Burnout, stress and health of employees on non‐standard work schedules: a study of Canadian workers
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
Abstract This study examined the relationship between non‐standard work schedules (shift work and weekend work) and job burnout, stress and psychosomatic health problems among full‐time employed Canadians in a large metropolitan city on the east coast. Data were collected by means of a structured mail back questionnaire (N = 376). Employees involved with weekend work reported significantly higher emotional exhaustion, job stress and psychosomatic health problems than employees not involved with weekend work. Similarly, employees on non‐standard work shifts (other than fixed day shift, 9 a.m.–5 p.m.) reported significantly higher overall burnout, emotional exhaustion, job stress and health problems than employees on a fixed day shift. Results from two‐way ANOVA indicated that employees involved with weekend work and non‐fixed day shifts reported significantly higher emotional exhaustion and health problems than other employees. Implications of the findings are discussed for future researchers in light of employee well‐being and non‐standard work schedules. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it