Tension at the borders: perceptions of role overload, conflict, strain and facilitation in work, family and health roles among employed individuals with arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine inter-relationships among arthritis (A), work (W) and personal life (P) roles and their reciprocal influences, especially experiences of role balance/imbalance among individuals with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and OA. METHODS: Eight focus groups were conducted with 24 women and 16 men (aged 29-72 years). A purposive sample was recruited from community advertising. Eligibility included current employment or having been employed within the previous year. Participants were asked about ways arthritis, work and personal life roles intersected and their impact. A standardized questionnaire collected demographic, symptom and employment data for descriptive purposes. RESULTS: Participants noted that having arthritis affected their identity and intersected with work and personal roles, creating role overload, role conflict, role strain and role facilitation. Role overload highlighted that arthritis both affected and was impacted by work and personal life (A → W; A → P; W → A; P → A). Role conflict focused on A → W and A → P difficulties, whereas role facilitation emphasized the positive impact of work and personal life roles on arthritis (W → A; P → A). Role strain was pervasive and arose from numerous sources. Personal strategies (e.g. positive framing) and contextual factors (e.g. support) were important in contributing to or ameliorating role balance/imbalance. CONCLUSIONS: By comprehensively examining multiple types of role balance/imbalance and the context within which it occurs, this study identifies gaps in patient-oriented measurement of the impact of arthritis and areas of need in the development of arthritis intervention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".