Interaction of Lifestyle and Work Ability Index in Blue Collar Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early labor force exit is one of the major problems worldwide. The present study investigates the relationship between work ability and lifestyle. METHODS: This study was conducted at a manufacturing plant in Tehran in 2012. All 851 male workers in this plant were included into the study and their work ability was assessed using the Work Ability Index (WAI). Based on the obtained scores, the participants were then classified into four work ability groups (poor, moderate, good, or excellent). Moreover, the participants' lifestyles were studied in three areas, including physical activity, cigarette smoking, and Body Mass Index (BMI). RESULTS: The average work ability index score was 42.07, ranging from 7-48. Among the participants, 6.4% (43), 6.5% (44), 38.3% (259), and 48.8% (330) were in the groups with poor, moderate, good, and excellent work ability, respectively. The results of logistic regression analysis showed that there is a significant relationship between work ability and lifestyle (cigarette smoking, BMI, and physical activity) even after adjustment for confounding variables (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of the present study, there might be a relationship between work ability and lifestyle (physical activity, BMI, cigarette smoking). Therefore, it is recommended to implement a lifestyle quality enhancement program to improve work ability in working environments.
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".