MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411016792 · doi:10.61959/pvfy6434e

Employed Caregivers in Canada: Infographic Compilation

2023· report· en· W4411016792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Magnaye

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfographicComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are pleased to announce the release of our latest co-publication on employed caregivers in Canada, produced in partnership with Research on Aging, Policies and Practice (RAPP). This compilation includes six infographics that each provide insight into various aspects of caregiving and on the value and contributions of family caregivers across Canada. The infographics, which were created by Andrew Magnaye, Choong Kim, Jacquie Eales, and Janet Fast, utilize data from Statistics Canada’s 2018 General Social Survey on Caregiving and Care Receiving to update key indicators on working caregivers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0360.078
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.011

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 head0.385
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.063 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207