MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407000805 · doi:10.1177/10482911251314147

Organizational and Structural Factors in Building the Therapeutic Alliance in a Work Rehabilitation Program With Injured Immigrant Workers in Quebec

2025· article· en· W4407000805 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Daniel Côté, Maude Arsenault, Jessica Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de MontréalInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsAllianceRehabilitationImmigrationQualitative researchOccupational therapyFocus groupWork (physics)NursingOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsSocial workMedicinePsychologyPoison controlBusinessSociologyPolitical sciencePsychiatryPhysical therapyMedical emergencyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The therapeutic alliance is central to occupational rehabilitation, particularly for immigrant workers who face unique challenges of migration and of social and occupational integration. This study explores the development and maintenance of this alliance between immigrant workers with compensated work injuries and their care providers during work rehabilitation. Using ethnography, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups, the qualitative case study involved 7 injured immigrant workers and their interdisciplinary clinical team. The study identified several factors that weakened the alliance, including administrative complexity, conflicting views on pain and disability, cultural stereotypes, and interorganizational communication issues. Many of these challenges were systemic and structural, occurring outside the clinic, complicating the rehabilitation process, and potentially prolonging the duration of disability. This paper discusses these systemic issues and their implications for the rehabilitation of immigrant workers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0240.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health PolicySame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207