Construction work and risk of occupational disability: a ten year follow up of 14 474 male workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Most industrialised countries have public income maintenance programmes to protect workers in case of disability but studies addressing disability risk of specific professional groups are rare. The objective of this study was to establish a detailed pattern of the nature and extent of occupational disability among construction workers. METHODS: A cohort study was set up including 14,474 male workers from the construction industry in Württemberg (Germany) aged 25-64 years who underwent occupational health exams between 1986 and 1992. The cohort was linked to the regional pension register of the manual workers' pension insurance institution to identify workers who were granted a disability pension during the 10 year follow up. All-cause and cause specific standardised incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using disability rates from the general workforce and from all blue collar workers in Germany as references. RESULTS: In total, 2247 (16%) members of the cohort were granted a disability pension. Major causes of disability were musculoskeletal (45%) and cardiovascular diseases (19%). In comparison with the general workforce, construction workers experienced a higher risk of disability from cancer (SIR = 1.26; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.47), respiratory diseases (SIR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.55), musculoskeletal diseases (SIR = 2.16; 95% CI 2.03 to 2.30), injuries/poisoning (SIR = 2.52; 95% CI 2.06 to 3.05), and all causes combined (SIR = 1.47; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.53). When compared with the blue collar reference group, increased risks of disability among construction workers were found for musculoskeletal diseases (SIR = 1.53; 95% CI 1.44 to 1.63), injury/poisoning (SIR = 1.83; 95% CI 1.50 to 2.21), and all causes combined (SIR = 1.11; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.16). CONCLUSIONS: Musculoskeletal diseases and external causes are major factors limiting the work capability of construction workers and lead to an increased proportion of occupational disability.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".