MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999778524 · doi:10.12927/hcpap..16820

Nature and Prevalence of Mental Illness in the Workplace

2004· article· en· W1999778524 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carolyn S. Dewa, Paula Goering, Michele Caveen

Bibliographic record

VenueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHealth careEquity (law)Mental healthEpidemiologyPopulation healthMental illnessGerontologySociologyMedicineLibrary sciencePolitical sciencePsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This discussion paper explores the state of knowledge about the prevalence of mental illness and its effect on the working population. Major trends in the literature are also commented on, and significant gaps in knowledge are identified. Annually, 12% of Canadians from 15 to 64 years suffer from a mental disorder or substance dependence. Few studies have examined the prevalence of mental disorders among Canadian workers. Results from Ontario estimate that monthly, about 8% of the working population has a diagnosable mental disorder. Preliminary findings also indicate differences in the prevalence of mental disorders among workers with regard to occupation, age, sex, physical disorders, work environment and work-related stress. Studies indicate that mental and emotional health problems are associated with staggering social and economic costs, which create a heavy burden on the workplace. About one-third of society's depression-related productivity losses can be attributed to work disruptions. The impact of mental illness on the workplace has been examined in terms of its effect on presenteeism, absenteeism and disability days. The presence of any of these has been used to indicate decreased productivity, the largest burden arising from presenteeism. In total, Canada annually loses about $4.5 billion from this decreased productivity. Mental illness is also associated with short-term and long-term disability, which in turn is often related to insurance coverage. Mental illness related disability claims have doubled and mental illness accounts for 30% of disability claims, at a cost of $15 to $33 billion annually. The needs of the working population and employers must be addressed. We must be aware of patterns of mental disorder among occupational groups and industry sectors. In addition, we must understand how the disability benefit structure impacts the prevalence as well as patterns of disability related to mental illness. Effective policies and programs must be based on solid evidence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations141
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be HealthySame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207