Employment and Married Women's Health in Korea; Beneficial or Harmful?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether working married women in different occupational classes affected diverse health outcomes. METHODS: We used data for married women aged 25-59 (N=2,273) from the 2005 National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey. Outcome measures included physical/mental and subjective/objective indicators (self-rated poor health, chronic diseases, depression, and suicidal ideation from reported results; metabolic syndrome and dyslipidemia from health examination results). Age-standardized prevalence and logistic regression were employed to assess health status according to three types of working groups (housewives, married women in manual jobs, married women in non-manual jobs). Sociodemographic factors (age, numbers of children under 7, education, household income) and health behaviors (health examination, sleep, rest, exercise, smoking, drinking) and a psychological factor (stress) were considered as covariates. RESULTS: Non-manual married female workers in Korea showed better health status in all five health outcomes than housewives. The positive health effect for the non-manual group persisted in absolute (age-adjusted prevalence) and relative (odds ratio) measures, but multivariate analyses showed an insignificant association of the non-manual group with dyslipidemia. Manual female workers showed significantly higher age-adjusted prevalence of almost all health outcomes than housewives except chronic disease, but the associations disappeared after further adjustment for covariates regarding sleep, rest, and stress. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that examining the health impact of work on married women requires the consideration of occupational class.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".