MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110843672 · doi:10.1002/alz.036792

Effect of cumulative exposure to psychosocial stressors at work on global cognitive function: A 25‐year longitudinal study

2020· article· en· W3110843672 on OpenAlexaffabout
Caroline Duchaine, Chantal Brisson, Denis Talbot, Mahée Gilbert‐Ouimet, Xavier Trudel, Michel Vézina, Caroline Diorio, Yves Giguère, Alain Milot, Danielle Laurin

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsQuebec Network for Research on AgingUniversité du Québec à RimouskiCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité LavalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialStressorCohortGerontologyCognitionMedicineCohort studyPsychologyCumulative incidenceDementiaConfoundingDemographyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background By 2050, an estimated 152 million people will be living with dementia. Prospective studies suggest that exposure to psychosocial stressors at work could be associated with a higher risk of mild cognitive impairment or dementia, but the evidence is still not clear. Method This study aimed to evaluate the effect of cumulative exposure to psychosocial stressors at work on global cognitive function in a cohort followed for over 25 years. At baseline in 1991‐1993 (T1), 9,188 white‐collar workers were recruited. Two follow‐ups were carried out in 1999‐2001 (T2) and 2015‐2019 (T3). This analysis was done among 5,728 participants working in T2, which participated in T3. Global cognitive function was evaluated with the validated Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (Nasreddine, 2005) and categorized in three groups according to standardized cut‐offs. Psychosocial stressors at work were evaluated with the validated Job Content Questionnaire (Karasek, 1979) at each time. The effect of cumulative exposure to psychosocial stressors at work at T1 and T2 on cognitive function categories at T3 was estimated with marginal structural models using inverse probability of treatment and censoring weights. Each observation was weighted for the inverse of the probability of death and lost to follow‐up and adjusted for potential confounders measured at T1 (age, sex, education, number of years in the same job, comorbidities, and lifestyle habits). Multiple imputation of missing data was performed. Result Workers exposed to low job demand and those exposed to a passive job (low job demand combined with low job control) at both T1 and T2 were at higher risk of moderate to severe cognitive impairment than non‐exposed workers (prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of 1.34 (1.10;1.63), p=0.003, and 1.27 (1.05;1.54), p=0.012 respectively). Men, but not women, exposed to low job control at both T1 and T2 were at higher risk of moderate to severe cognitive impairment than non‐exposed workers (PR and 95% CI: 1.38 (1.07;1.79), p=0.015). No statistically significant associations were observed with the risk of mild cognitive impairment. Conclusion Primary prevention of cognitive impairment could be possible with the reduction of these frequent and modifiable psychosocial stressors at work.

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)0.002
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207