MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409358217 · doi:10.1136/jech-2024-223428

Precarious, non-standard and informal employment: a glossary

2025· article· en· W4409358217 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Ervin, Anthony D. LaMontagne, Faraz Vahid Shahidi, Yamna Taouk, Peter Smith, Tania King

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlossaryPrecarityScholarshipInformal sectorPhenomenonSpace (punctuation)SociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precarity in employment is an increasingly concerning global phenomenon. Yet, despite its rising prevalence and the significant impact it has on many people's lives and health, definitions of precarious employment are varied, and different terms are often used interchangeably. Differences between high-income and low-income and middle-income countries, as well as diverse cross-national labour market structures, further complicate the scholarship. The purpose of this glossary is to provide a point of reference in this complex landscape. Our aim is to synthesise and define key terms pertaining to precarious, non-standard and informal employment in order to guide ongoing application and understanding in this space. In addition, this glossary takes a preliminary step in defining some key and emerging constructs integral or related to understanding precarity in employment in the rapidly growing gig economy.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.012
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Epidemiology & Community HealthSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207