Changes in Perceived Job Strain and the Risk of Major Depression: Results From a Population-based Longitudinal Study
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
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.
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 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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