Association of Birthweight With Maternal Trajectories of Effort–Reward Imbalance and Demand–Control Across Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We assessed longitudinal patterns of effort-reward imbalance (ERI) and demand-control (DC) scores in pregnancy, and their association with newborn birthweight (BW). METHODS: Sixty-one women were surveyed four times across pregnancy using the ERI and DC questionnaires. Trajectories of change in ERI and DC scores across pregnancy were constructed using growth mixture modeling, and their associations with BW were examined with generalized linear regression. RESULTS: Declining ERI (diminishing effort with stable/increasing reward) was associated with higher BW (408 g; P = 0.015), and was robust to other work factors. DC trajectory was not significantly associated with BW. CONCLUSIONS: Declining ERI may reflect improved work psychosocial climate across pregnancy, or a conscious reduction in effort. The ERI model may represent more flexible work characteristics, whereas job control may be less amenable to short-term alteration. Surveys in more diverse pregnant working populations could be recommended.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".