Use of information communication technology and stress, burnout, and mental health in older, middle-aged, and younger workers – results from a systematic review
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
The aim of this systematic review is to summarise quantitative studies in occupational settings observing the association between Information communication technology (ICT) and stress, and burnout, considering age as an effect modifier. A systematic review using PRISMA guidelines was conducted through the following bibliographic databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Psycinfo, and the Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were occupational settings and content relevant to our research question. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Two interventional, 4 cohorts, and 29 cross-sectional studies were found. ICT use in occupational settings was associated with stress seen in cross-sectional studies, but not in interventional studies. There was a concordant association with ICT and burnout in different study designs. Overall, there were no linear trends between age and technostress. We suggest that the observed associations were mostly present in the middle-aged working population and that these associations need to be supported in further studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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