Effectiveness of a workplace intervention reducing psychosocial stressors at work on blood pressure and hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of a workplace intervention reducing psychosocial stressors at work in lowering blood pressure and hypertension prevalence. METHODS: The study design was a quasi-experimental pre-post study with an intervention group and a control group. Post-intervention measurements were collected 6 and 36 months after the midpoint of the intervention. Participants were all white-collar workers employed in three public organisations. At baseline, the intervention and the control groups were composed of 1088 and 1068 workers, respectively. The intervention was designed to reduce psychosocial stressors at work by implementing organisational changes. Adjusted changes in ambulatory blood pressure and hypertension prevalence were examined. RESULTS: Blood pressure and hypertension significantly decreased in the intervention group while no change was observed in the control group. The differential decrease in systolic blood pressure between the intervention and the control group was 2.0 mm Hg (95% CI: -3.0 to -1.0). The prevalence of hypertension decreased in the intervention group, when compared with the control group (prevalence ratio: 0.85 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.98)). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that psychosocial stressors at work are relevant targets for the primary prevention of hypertension. At the population level, systolic blood pressure reductions such as those observed in the present study could prevent a significant number of premature deaths and disabling strokes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".