MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406877205 · doi:10.1177/10482911241312387

Claim Suppression of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Among Precariously Employed Immigrant Workers in Ontario

2025· article· en· W4406877205 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Stéphanie Premji, Momtaz Begum, Kishower Laila

Bibliographic record

VenueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsLegislationLegislatureWorkers' compensationConceptualizationContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionQualitative researchImmigrationOccupational safety and healthPolitical scienceScope (computer science)EnforcementCompensation (psychology)Public relationsCriminologyMedicineLawPsychologySociologySocial psychologyNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employers sometimes hinder the appropriate reporting of claims to workers' compensation, a phenomenon termed claim suppression. While the magnitude of claim suppression is difficult to quantify, various reports have identified it as a significant concern. In response, several Canadian jurisdictions, such as Ontario in 2015, introduced legislation addressing claim suppression. This article first discusses the legislative and policy context that influences claim suppression in Ontario, including concerns concerning the scope, interpretation, and enforcement of the law. It then presents qualitative findings from a community-based study with members of the Toronto Bangladeshi immigrant community that documented varied forms of employer claim suppression in precarious work, as well as facilitators of claim suppression within the workers' compensation and health care systems. Our findings and those of other research suggest that the scope of claim suppression is broader than that contemplated by the legislation. Our article proposes recommendations for the conceptualization of claim suppression and for legislation, policies, practices, and interventions that are grounded in workers' lived experiences.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health PolicySame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207