Beyond the workplace: An exploratory study of the impact of neurotoxic workplace exposure on marital relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact on family life and social relations that may result from symptoms associated with exposure to neurotoxic substances has never been addressed. This exploratory study assessed the associations between exposure to neurotoxic agents in the workplace, mental health, and marital difficulties. METHODS: Fifty-five (55) male workers and their spouses completed standardized measures of mental health and marital difficulties. Workers' exposure to neurotoxic substances was evaluated by questionnaire and interview, using a semiquantitative classification system. RESULTS: A positive relation was observed between exposure level and measures of workers' psychological symptoms and marital stress; no relation was observed between workers' exposure level and wives' psychological symptoms. More severe exposure to neurotoxic substances was associated with wives' reports of more severe marital conflicts, and this association was mediated by husbands' psychological symptoms. As compared to low exposure husbands, high exposure husbands reported higher degrees of stress surrounding marital discussions, more consistent incidence of minor physical assaults by wives, and stronger associations between their levels of stress, the verbal aggressions of wives, and the number of marital conflicts. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirm that neurotoxic exposure is a risk factor for mental health and suggest how this may influence marital relations. Because of the importance of these findings for the well-being of workers and their families, these associations should be further studied.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".