Participation in paid and unpaid work by adults with rheumatoid arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define determinants of participation in paid and unpaid work by adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A survey was designed in consultation with working age (< 65 yrs) adults with RA and sent to 269 patients recruited through 5 rheumatology practices. Hours worked "last week" was the measure of participation in employment and unpaid work (household, home maintenance, caregiving, studying, and volunteering). Potential determinants, conceptually organized as attributes of the person, environment, or occupation, were ascertained. RESULTS: Recruitment response rate was 40% of patients invited, and 89% of those recruited submitted complete surveys. The 239 respondents were mostly women (81%), with mean age 50 years and duration of RA 13 years. Respondents reported an average of 47 hours of work: 19 paid and 28 unpaid hours. Regression analyses indicated more hours of paid work were associated with psychologically demanding work, higher social function, less pain, being male, managerial job type, and lower ratings of occupational balance. More hours of unpaid work were associated with more children in the household, greater perceived physical and psychological demand of the work, social support from family, and having a post-secondary education. Work limitations, reported by 73 respondents, were associated with lower functional status, more pain, and less psychologically demanding work. CONCLUSION: Factors associated with greater participation in paid work differed from those associated with unpaid work. Work limitation affects both paid and unpaid workers. Work-related rehabilitation and education programs may be enhanced by addressing factors identified by this sample of paid and unpaid workers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".