Predictors of worker mental health in intellectual disability services during COVID‐19
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities experience significant stress in their essential role during COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to describe the experience of these workers and determine predictors of emotional distress. METHODS: Eight hundred and thirty-eight workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities completed an online survey about their work during COVID-19 and their mental health in July 2020. RESULTS: One in four workers reported moderate to severe emotional distress. Being older and more experienced, having counselling services available through one's agency, and engaging in regular exercise or hobbies outside work were associated with less distress. Workers who reported increased stress in the workplace, stigma towards their families because of their job, personal fears about spreading COVID-19, and receipt of medications for mental health conditions or therapy reported greater distress. CONCLUSIONS: More attention is needed to address the mental health of workers supporting adults with intellectual disabilities as they continue their essential work during the pandemic.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 it