MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7146471547

女性による非雇用型在宅ワークにおける健康影響とその要因

2002· article· ja· W7146471547 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Makoto Takahashi, Akiko Kawai

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllowance (engineering)Work (physics)Balance (ability)Cumulative incidenceMental fatigueMental healthQuarter (Canadian coin)Cumulative risk
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the previous report,it was suggested that non-employed women doing home-based work had difficulties in securing their jobs with stability and making use of their ability, and that these women of ten had failures to achieve a balance between work and childcare or household responsibilities. This report focused on the analysis of the health effects and relevant factors of the home-based work done by non-employed women. The results of 95 respondents by means of a questionnaire survey showed that about a quarter of them complained of self-reported cumulative physical fatigue and over one-third cumulative mental fatigue due to home-base work. The multiple regression analysis of the rusults reveale d that the incidence of cumulative physical fatigue was correlated wi th long home-based working time, failures to avail themselves of enough freetime, and working in an uncomfortable environment with glare or noise. Cumulative mental fatigue was correlated with insufficient time allowance for job accomplishment deadlines, performing unwished jobs,inappropriate equipment and facilities and the lack of working space. The need for considering these multiple factors in improving conditions of home-based work was suggested.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.011

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207