Understanding Limitations in At-work Productivity in Patients with Active Ankylosing Spondylitis: The Role of Work-related Contextual Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of health-related and contextual factors on presenteeism, absenteeism, and overall work productivity loss in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Consecutive patients with AS starting their first tumor necrosis factor inhibitor and in paid employment were eligible. Patients completed the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire for AS to assess presenteeism, absenteeism, and overall work productivity loss in the previous 7 days. In addition, they answered questions about work characteristics (type, characteristics of workplace, satisfaction of contacts with colleagues, and importance of work in life) and health status [Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), AS Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP)]. Physicians assessed the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index, presence of articular and extraarticular manifestations, comorbidities, and laboratory indicators of inflammation. Stepwise regression models were computed to determine which work-related and health-related factors contributed to WPAI outcomes. RESULTS: The study included 80 patients. The WPAI presenteeism, absenteeism, and overall work productivity loss scores were 49.1%, 30.2%, and 53.1%, respectively. Presenteeism was associated with higher BASFI, female sex, and poor quality of contact with colleagues. Absenteeism was associated with increasing age, current smoking status, higher ASDAS-CRP, and low importance of work for life. Overall work productivity loss was associated with female sex, higher BASFI, past adaptation of job because of illness, number of working hours, and manual profession. CONCLUSION: Both health-related and contextual factors contribute to work limitations in patients with AS and suggest additional opportunities for improvement by addressing the working environment.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".