Stress at the place of work and cognitive functions among women performing intellectual work during peri- and post-menopausal period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
perspectives for years [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12], relatively little is known about the situation of working women with menopausal symptoms.Since most of women remain professionally active in their fifties and sixties, we have to consider the effect of menopause on work capability and work performance.This problem seems to be important also from the perspective of aging societies and speculation on the need of extending the period of work activity.In the context of work, 2 issues related to menopausal transition seem to be of special importance: the effect of stress and menopausal status on cognitive functioning. Stress and cognitive functionsstructural and functional connectionsTo simplify the problem, it may be accepted that cognitive functions concern the processes taking place in the brain, related to the receipt, storage, transformation, and further passing of information acquired from the environment.According to Nęcka et al., cognitive processes may be divided into elementary (attention and awareness, cognitive control, perception, memory, memory activities), and complex (thinking and reasoning, problem Abstract Objectives: The analysis of the relationship between stress at work and results of cognitive functions amongst women, at peri-and post-menopausal age, performing intellectual work.Material and Methods: The study group included women, aged 45-66 years old, employed as intellectual workers.Research instruments were: the Montreal Cognitive Assessment; computer tests of the CNS Vital Signs; the Subjective Work Characteristics Questionnaire, and a questionnaire designed by the author.The results were statistically analyzed.Results: Nearly a half of respondents experienced high stress at the place of work; 1/3 -on the average level, on a low level -every fifth.The largest number of respondents experienced stress caused by social contacts.Among a half of the women, stress was caused by the lack of awards at work, followed by the lack of support.Slightly fewer of them experienced stress caused by the feeling of psychological load related to the complexity of work or the feeling of uncertainty caused by the organization of work.Every third woman experienced stress due to the sense of responsibility or the lack of control.The smallest number experienced stress caused by physical arduousness, the sense of threat and unpleasant working conditions.The examined women obtained the best results with respect to simple attention, the worst results -with respect to the reaction time.The results concerning the remaining 9 cognitive functions were ranked in the middle of the aforementioned results.The intensity of stress at work and factors which caused this stress, negatively correlated with simple attention of women in the early peri-menopausal period, while positively correlating with the psychomotor and processing speed of women in the late peri-menopausal period.Among the post-menopausal women, negative correlations were observed between the majority of cognitive functions and the intensity of stress at work, and the majority of factors which caused this stress.Conclusions: Cognitive functions of the examined women remained within the range of average evaluations, and were correlated with stress-inducing factors at the place of work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".