Effects of Job Strain on Blood Pressure: A Prospective Study of Male and Female White-Collar 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
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether cumulative exposure to job strain increases blood pressure. METHODS: A prospective study of 8395 white-collar workers was initiated during 1991 to 1993. At follow-up, 7.5 years later, 84% of the participants were reassessed to estimate cumulative exposure to job strain. RESULTS: Compared with men who had never been exposed, men with cumulative exposure and those who became exposed during follow-up showed significant systolic blood pressure increments of 1.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.1, 3.5) and 1.5 mm Hg (95% CI=0.2, 2.8), respectively, and relative risks of blood pressure increases in the highest quintile group of 1.33 (95% CI = 1.01, 1.76) and 1.40 (95% CI = 1.14, 1.73). Effect magnitudes were smaller among women. Effects tended to be more pronounced among men and women with low levels of social support at work. CONCLUSIONS: Among these white-collar workers, exposure to cumulative job strain had a modest but significant effect on systolic blood pressure among men. The risk was of comparable magnitude to that observed for age and sedentary behavior. Men and women with low levels of social support at work appeared to be at higher risk for increases in blood pressure.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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