Changes in Perceived Job Strain and the Risk of Major Depression: Results From a Population-based Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Major depression is a prevalent mental disorder in the working population. Improving the work environment may reduce the risk of major depression. The authors examined data from the longitudinal cohort of the Canadian National Population Health Survey from 1994-1995 to 2004-2005. Survey participants were classified into 4 groups by changes in job strain status from 1994-1995 to 2000-2001 (no change in low job strain, no change in high job strain, changing from high to low job strain, and changing from low to high job strain). The incidence proportion of major depressive episodes in each of the 4 groups was 4.0%, 8.0%, 4.4%, and 6.9%, respectively. Participants who reported a change from high to low job strain had a risk of major depression similar to those exposed to persistently low job strain. Among those exposed to persistent high job strain, only participants who reported good or excellent health at baseline had a higher risk of major depression, but those who reported fair or poor health did not. Reducing job strain may have positive impacts on the risk of depression. Self-rated health is a strong predictor of depression and plays an important role in the relation between job strain and depression.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".