MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984242298 · doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000001768

Descriptive Epidemiology of Gradual Return to Work for Workers With a Work-Acquired Musculoskeletal Disorder in British Columbia, Canada

2019· article· en· W2984242298 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Esther T. Maas, Mieke Koehoorn, Chris McLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMichael Smith Health Research BCCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorkSafeBC
KeywordsWorkers' compensationLogistic regressionMusculoskeletal disorderMedicineEpidemiologyOccupational safety and healthWageWork (physics)Musculoskeletal injuryOccupational medicineHuman factors and ergonomicsSick leaveAbsenteeismDescriptive statisticsDemographyInjury preventionCompensation (psychology)Environmental healthPhysical therapyPoison controlPsychologyLabour economicsEngineeringSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the injury, socio-demographic, workplace, and temporal characteristics related with gradual return to work (RTW) among workers with a work-acquired musculoskeletal disorder in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: Accepted workers' compensation lost-time claims were extracted between 2010 and 2015 (n = 141,490). A multivariable logistic regression model was used to analyze the determinants of Gradual RTW. RESULTS: Within 1 year after injury, 41.0% of workers had at least 1 day of Gradual RTW. Serious injury severity, female sex, increasing age, wage, and firm size, longer sickness absence, and recent previous claims increased the proportion of workers being provided with Gradual RTW. CONCLUSION: Consideration of injury, socio-demographic, workplace, and temporal variability in the provision of Gradual RTW can identify inequalities in the provision and increase effective use of Gradual RTW for workers with musculoskeletal disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207