The Cost of Caregiving: The Disproportionate and Invisible Impact of COVID-19 on Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic had a global impact, altering how society and those within it function. While these changes affected almost everyone, there is evidence that women were disproportionately impacted. This reflexive thematic analysis included data gathered from parents, social work students, university faculty, and school board professionals (n = 113) from 2020 to 2023. We explored the experiences of female-identified parents and caregivers during COVID-19. The findings underscore the intense but often invisible burden that women, specifically mothers and caregivers, experienced throughout the pandemic. We found that women experienced acute stress in the realms of paid and unpaid labour, childcare, children's academics, and family mental health. Implications include a call to acknowledge this disproportionate impact and its consequences for gender equity, a recognition of the ongoing impact of COVID-19 on children, youth, families, and women, a recognition of the invisible labour that often falls upon women, and the implementation of critical methodologies in social work education and research to foster the use of such approaches within the field.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".