Psychosocial working conditions and depressive disorder: disentangling effects of job control from socioeconomic status using a life-course approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Job control, the combination of skill discretion and decision authority, is considered a central component of the psychosocial working environment. This longitudinal study examines the relation between job control and risk of incident depressive disorder using a life-course approach. METHODS: We analyze data from The Danish Work Life Course Cohort study, including all Danish individuals aged 15-30 who entered the Danish labor market during 1995-2009 and were free from depressive disorder at entry (955,573 individuals). We measured job control using a job exposure matrix. Depressive disorders were measured using information from nationwide registers of psychiatric in- and outpatient admissions. Using Cox regression models we estimated the prospective association between job control and risk of incident depressive disorders. Analyses accounted for a range of potential confounders prior to workforce entry including socioeconomic status in adolescence and parental psychiatric and somatic diagnoses prior to labor market entry, together with potential confounders in adulthood including income, education, and demographics. RESULTS: Lower levels of past year job control were associated with a higher risk of depressive disorder after adjustment for all covariates (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.16-1.38). Results stratified by gender showed associations for both men (HR = 1.38, 95% CI 1.19-1.61) and women (HR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.08-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the level of job control at work affects the risk of clinically diagnosed depressive disorder, and that this association is not due to confounding by socioeconomic status.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".