MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945096382 · doi:10.1093/annweh/wxz028

Psychosocial Work Conditions and Mental Health: Examining Differences Across Mental Illness and Well-Being Outcomes

2019· article· en· W2945096382 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jonathan Fan, Cameron Mustard, Peter Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Work Exposures and Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychosocialFlourishingPsychological interventionMental illnessPsychologyPsychiatryOdds ratioPopulationAnxietySocial supportClinical psychologyOddsMedicineLogistic regressionEnvironmental healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Psychosocial work conditions are determinants of mental illness among worker populations. However, while the focus on negative aspects of mental health has generated important contributions to the development of workplace interventions, there is less evidence on the factors that support the positive aspects of mental well-being. This study aimed to examine the association between psychosocial work conditions and mental health outcomes among a representative sample of Canadian workers; and to assess whether the relationships are consistent across measures of mental illness versus mental well-being. METHODS: Population-based data were obtained from the cross-sectional 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey. Psychosocial work conditions were measured using an abbreviated version of the Job Content Questionnaire. For mental illness, we focused on major depressive episodes, generalized anxiety disorders, and bipolar disorders in the past 12 months, as measured using Composite International Diagnostic Interview criteria. Mental well-being was defined as having flourishing mental health, based on items from the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form. Regression models provided odds ratios (ORs) and fitted probabilities for the relationship between work conditions and mental health, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Higher levels of job control, social support, and job security were associated with being free of disorders (ORs ranging from 1.08 to 1.15) as well as having flourishing mental health (ORs ranging from 1.10 to 1.14). Lower physical effort was associated with decreased odds of having flourishing mental health (OR 0.89). Psychological demands were not associated with any of the mental health outcomes in the fully-adjusted models. The overall pattern of these relationships was consistent across the two outcome models, although there was evidence of heterogeneity on the absolute probability scale. Specifically, there was a relatively stronger relationship between job control/social support/physical demands and well-being outcomes, compared with disorder outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial work conditions were associated with both negative and positive measures of mental health. However, mental illness and mental well-being may represent complementary, yet distinct, aspects in relation to psychosocial work conditions. Interventions targeting the psychosocial work environment may serve to improve both of these dimensions, although the measurement and examination of specific dimensions may be required to obtain an integrated and comprehensive understanding of mental health in the workplace.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Work Exposures and HealthSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207