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
OBJECTIVES: This article describes the characteristics of shift workers and compares stress factors and health behaviours of shift and regular daytime workers. Based on an analysis of people followed over four years, associations between the incidence of chronic conditions and changes in psychological distress levels are explored in relation to working shift. DATA SOURCES: Data are from the 2000/01 Canadian Community Health Survey, the longitudinal (1994/95, 1996/97 and 1998/99) and cross-sectional (1994/95) components of the National Population Health Survey, and the Survey of Work Arrangements (1991 and 1995). ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Cross-tabulations were used to profile shift workers and to compare some of their health behaviours and sources of stress with those of regular daytime workers. Multivariate analyses were used to examine associations between shift work and the incidence of chronic conditions and changes in psychological distress levels over four years, controlling for other potential confounders. MAIN RESULTS: Men who worked an evening, rotating or irregular shift had increased odds of reporting having been diagnosed with a chronic condition over a four-year period. For both sexes, an evening shift was associated with increases in psychological distress levels over two years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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