Work Situation After Breast Cancer: Results From a Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer may adversely affect work experience. We assessed whether there was evidence of discrimination at work, defined as negative or involuntary changes in employment situation (including changes in position, wages, and other conditions), associated with a breast cancer diagnosis in a population-based retrospective cohort study conducted in Quebec, Canada. METHODS: The study was based on the consecutive series of women aged less then 60 years when first treated for breast cancer (identified through the Quebec Tumor Registry) and a random sample of frequency-matched women living in Quebec (identified from provincial health care files) who had never been diagnosed with cancer. Eligibility for the study was restricted to women who were employed at the time of diagnosis (for breast cancer survivors) or the same calendar period (for women in the comparison group). We conducted telephone interviews of eligible women 3 years after diagnosis for 646 survivors or after the matched calendar period for 890 women in the comparison group. Binomial regression was used to evaluate the relationship between having breast cancer and work situation. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Working conditions were similar between the two groups at the beginning of follow-up. After 3 years, slightly more survivors (21%) than women in the comparison group (15%) were unemployed (adjusted relative risk for being unemployed = 1.29, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.59), although most women who were not working (84% of unemployed survivors and 76% of unemployed women in the comparison group) said that the decision to stop working was their own. Among women still employed, no deterioration in working conditions was observed in either group. CONCLUSION: We found little evidence that women diagnosed with breast cancer experience discrimination at work. This information may be helpful for working women concerned about employment after breast cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".