MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987900283 · doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000001761

Direct, Absenteeism, and Disability Cost Burden of Obesity Among Privately Insured Employees

2019· article· en· W2987900283 on OpenAlexaff
Abhilasha Ramasamy, François Laliberté, Shoghag A. Aktavoukian, Dominique Lejeune, Maral DerSarkissian, Cristi Cavanaugh, B. Gabriel Smolarz, Rahul Ganguly, Mei Sheng Duh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbsenteeismObesityHealth careIndirect costsOddsGovernment (linguistics)BusinessOdds ratioEnvironmental healthMedicineLogistic regressionEconomicsEconomic growthManagementAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare obesity-related costs of employees of the healthcare industry versus other major US industries. METHODS: Employees with obesity versus without were identified using the Optum Health Reporting and Insights employer claims database (January, 2010 to March, 2017). Employees working in healthcare with obesity were compared with employees of other industries with obesity for absenteeism/disability and direct cost differences. Multivariate models estimated the association between industries and high costs compared with the healthcare industry. RESULTS: Obesity-related absenteeism/disability and direct costs were higher in several US industries compared with the healthcare industry (adjusted cost differences of $-1220 to $5630). Employees of the government/education/religious services industry (GERS) with obesity (BMI of 30 or greater) had significantly higher odds of direct costs at the 80th percentile and above (odds ratio vs healthcare industry = 2.20; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Relative to the healthcare industry, employees of other industries, especially GERS, incurred higher obesity-related costs.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207