MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2029397082 · doi:10.2118/112025-ms

Stress Resilience: A Joint Accountability

2008· article· en· W2029397082 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patricia A. Ferris, Michelle Colleton

Notice bibliographique

RevueSPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueWorkplace Health and Well-being
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésStressorOccupational stressOccupational safety and healthStaffingFacilitatorPsychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsDistressWork (physics)NursingApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicinePoison controlMedical emergencyEngineeringClinical psychologySocial psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract In 2005, Occupational Health personnel noted the number of employees accessing for ergonomic illness had increased. An occupational health consultant and the medical doctor subsequently reviewed medical files and interviewed those employees treated for ergonomic illness in the past year. Consistent with the research in ergonomic illnesses, they found that work stress (high demands and low control) contributed to the development of ergonomic illnesses. In consultation with the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) provider and human resources, occupational health collaborated in the development of a comprehensive initiative to reduce personal and organizational stressors. The long-term goal of the project was to reduce ergonomic illness. A large Business Unit (BU) implemented the project in April 2006 and 178 employees from 15 teams participated in a two-stage process. Team members first completed a measure of personal and job stress then attended a half-day workshop that reviewed the stress response and various methods of controlling personal stress. The workshop facilitator compiled the individual scores into team scores reflecting the portion of employees that fell within four levels of stress scores: caution, strain, balance, and optimal. Employees then attended a second session that reviewed their team scores and specific team job stressors. Teams discussed their stressors and developed action plans to address these. Over one-third of those participating in the project identified significant distress in work in three areas measured: work changes, work pressures, and work resources. Analysis of workplace stressors identified three priority actions: a) ensure a reasonable level of job demand through increased staffing and job analyses; b) manage change in a planned and rational manner; and c) improve job resources through the in-sourcing of IT and accounting and the provision of adequate software and physical settings. Finally, analyses suggested consideration of increasing compensation packages and benchmarking exceptional leaders for the purpose of selection and promotion. One year after completion of the project ergonomic illness incidence has decreased from 17 to 3 in the same employee population and EAP access for job related issues has decreased from 6 to 1 at a time when other BU access has greatly increased. Extensive research in the past century has implicated stress in over half of human morbidity and mortality (Quick, 1998). Job stress is a common problem in industrialized countries creating financial and health burdens to organizations and employees alike. A 2006 article in the "Montreal Gazette" summarized the costs of stress to Canadian businesses. For example, about 20 per cent of the payroll of a typical company goes toward dealing with stress-related problems such as absenteeism, employee turnover, disability leaves, counseling, medicine, and accidents. Work-life conflict costs Canadian business $4.5 billion to $10 billion a year. Stress, depression and addiction are a $33-billion-a-year drain on Canada's economy. Stress is a key factor in the onset of mental illness, now the leading cause of worker disability (about one-third of disability insurance claims in Canada relate to mental-health problems). The general stress literature conceptualizes stress as a process encompassing the physiological response to emergencies and to environmental and interpersonal demands placed on an individual (Quick). Although there is no absolutely agreed upon definition of stress, stress is most frequently defined as an individual, psycho-physiological, and subjective state, characterized by the combination of high arousal and displeasure (Cannon, 1929; Kristensen, Kornitzer, & Alfredson, 1998: cited in Kompier, 2002). Strain results from stress that is too intense, too frequent, or too prolonged. Depression, vital exhaustion, anxiety, psychological distress, and sleeping difficulties are frequently noted reactions to prolonged stress (Rosengren et al., 2004). The most distal outcome of stress is negative health outcomes such as CHD and diabetes (Hurrell, Nelson & Simmons, 1998). The concept of job stress is often confused with the concept of challenge. However, challenge and stress are different processes. Under conditions of challenge, individuals feel energized both psychologically and physically. The body does not release stress hormones and individuals are motivated to learn and master new skills. When individuals feel challenged they are relaxed and feel satisfied. Thus, challenge is an important ingredient for healthy and productive work. Stress is associated with negative perceptions, negative emotions, and destructive psychological and physical processes and typically results in a deterioration of performance on a task.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,021
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,021
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,110

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0210,033
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,009
Communication savante0,0090,005
Science ouverte0,0010,016
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0120,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,088
Tête enseignante GPT0,357
Écart entre enseignants0,269 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and ProductionMême sujetWorkplace Health and Well-beingTravaux en français237 207