The Impact of Online Labor Platforms on Workforce Management in Health Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unlabelled: Online labor platforms (OLPs) have the potential to change how the workforce is allocated and managed in health care. The contracting, coordination, and communication of bookings and work assignments happen on these platforms in near real-time with no delay and without any human interactions. This perspective paper describes the worldwide trend toward OLPs in health care, gives an overview of the functioning of these platforms, and discusses the prospects and challenges for health care management. As a real-world case, the platform logic, growth and traffic of a Swiss OLP designed for temporary nurse deployment are presented. OLPs facilitate managing different work arrangements (float pools and temporary work) through (1) offering health care staff flexible work options, which in turn lowers the dropout rates of health care professionals; and (2) effectively managing internal staffing allowing human resource sharing within and across health care organizations. For health care management research, OLPs yield data that can be used to analyze the characteristics, use, and dynamics of flexible work arrangements and temporary work in health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".