Integrating social protection and occupational health services: A scoping review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Human health is shaped by physiological factors and by social, environmental, behavioural, and political conditions. Annually, occupational risks are a major contributor to a significant number of avoidable deaths and disability‐adjusted life‐years. Addressing such determinants requires action beyond the health sector, with increasing recognition of the value of multisectoral approaches to achieving health equity. Social protection and occupational health services systems both address these determinants of health and share a public health objective: preventing occupational injuries and diseases, supporting healthcare access, and facilitating rehabilitation. Among social protection schemes, social health protection plays a core role. This scoping review identifies documented linkages between social health protection and occupational health services in the global literature, highlighting both promising practices and coordination gaps between these two sub‐systems. Strengthening these linkages through intersectoral policy and practice can reinforce both systems, particularly in the face of global crises such as climate change. To our knowledge, this is the first mapping of the published literature on this issue.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it