MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001270351 · doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000001822

Does Depression Mediate the Effect of Work Organization Conditions on Job Performance?

2020· article· en· W3001270351 on OpenAlexafffund
Annick Parent‐Lamarche, Alain Marchand, Sabine Saade

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMediationJob insecurityCluster samplingPath analysis (statistics)Psychological interventionPsychologyJob performanceScheduleDepression (economics)Work (physics)Cluster (spacecraft)Simple random sampleSample (material)Sampling (signal processing)Applied psychologyClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthSocial psychologyMedicineJob satisfactionComputer scienceStatisticsPsychiatryMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The present study proposes to shed light on the impact of workers' depression on their work performance. METHODS: We implemented a path analyses adjusted for design effects resulting from cluster sampling using MPlus software on a sample of 1957 workers. These analyses allowed us to evaluate direct and indirect effects (mediation) while taking into account the nonindependence of observations due to cluster sampling (workers nested in their workplace). RESULTS: Results indicate that three indirect associations were found to be significant. Psychological demands, work schedule, and job insecurity were indirectly associated with lower levels of professional efficacy/job performance because of their positive associations with depression. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained suggest that interventions targeting specific work organization conditions could be warranted.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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