MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding the long-term retention of personal support workers in Canadian home and long-term care

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414513341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryan Hron

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveFocus groupFocus (optics)TurnoverPersonal careCare work

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter delves into the retention of long-tenured care workers in Canada. While turnover is a critical challenge for organisations dependent on care workers, profoundly affecting both recipients of care and their families, this chapter shifts focus to the factors that encourage retention. Through in-depth interviews with 15 long-term personal support workers in Ontario, Canada, the chapter uncovers a diverse array of motivations that sustain these workers in their roles. Additionally, it reveals the complex pressures and barriers that may compel care workers to remain in their positions even when they might otherwise consider leaving. This exploration provides valuable insights into the dynamics of retention in the care sector, shedding light on both the incentives and constraints that shape workers’ decisions to stay.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207