SS35-02 TELEWORKING TO SUPPORT ACCOMMODATION, INCLUSION, AND HEALTH OF WORKERS WITH CHRONIC ILLNESSES: DESIGN AND VALIDATION OF THE LOGIC MODEL OF A REFLECTIVE UTILIZATION GUIDE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Despite some exploratory work suggesting courses of action to use telework as a modality facilitating accommodation, inclusion and health among singular populations of workers, such as people with physical disabilities, no guidelines are available to ensure a healthy application of telework among people having chronic illnesses. This study aimed to develop a reflective telework utilization guide to support the accommodation, inclusion, and health of workers with chronic illnesses. Methods Focus groups with teleworkers and individual interviews with managers enabled collecting qualitative data to generate the logic model of a reflective telework utilization guide. A validation process was also undertaken. Results Preliminary results highlight the concerns and recommendations of workers and managers regarding telework and its ability to support accommodation, inclusion and health. The logical model that was generated and validated is presented. Discussion On a practical level, the guide represents a concrete tool that managers and workers can use. This study’s research contribution is to pave the way for other projects aimed at developing innovative and effective solutions in promoting the accommodation, inclusion, and health of workers with chronic illnesses. Finally, on a societal level, the study results help to explain the influence of telework on the health and inclusion of all workers and encourage people to use the guide to promote healthy participation in telework. Conclusion This study proposes a concrete tool to support healthy work participation of workers with chronic illnesses, a growing population that forms an indispensable and qualified resource, especially in the context of the labour shortage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".