Prospective Impact of Psychiatric Disorders on Employment Status and Health Care Use in Patients Investigated for Occupational Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We previously reported high rates (34%) of psychiatric disorders (PSY) in patients evaluated for occupational asthma (OA). We determined the impact of PSY on employment status and health care use 12 to 18 months later. METHODS: One hundred ninety-six patients underwent clinical and psychiatric interviews on the day of their OA evaluation. Patients were re-contacted 12to 18 months later to assess employment status and health care use. RESULTS: Results indicated that patients with a PSY at baseline were less likely to be employed (adjusted odds ratio = 2.88; 95% confidence interval = 1.29 to 6.44) irrespective of final medical diagnosis (including OA), and had higher rates of emergency visits (35% vs 19%, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Psychiatric morbidity is common in this population and associated with lower employment rates and greater use of emergency services. Greater efforts should be made to assess and treat PSY in this population.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".