Demographic, Lifestyle, and Physical Health Predictors of Sickness Absenteeism in Nursing: A Meta-Analysis
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: Sickness absenteeism is an area of concern in nursing and is more concerning given the recent impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare. This study is one of two meta-analyses that examined sickness absenteeism in nursing. In this study, we examined demographic, lifestyle, and physical health predictors. METHODS: We reviewed five databases (CINAHL, ProQuest Allied, ProQuest database theses, PsycINFO, and PubMed) for our search. We registered the systematic review (CRD de-identified) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Additionally, we used the Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome Tool to improve our searches. Results: Following quality testing, 17 articles were used for quantitative synthesis. Female employees were at higher risks of sickness absenteeism than their male counterparts (OR = 1.73; 95% CI: 1.33-2.25). Nursing staff who rated their health as poor had a greater likelihood of experiencing sickness absence (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.19-1.60). Also, previous sick leave predicted future leaves (OR = 3.35; 95% CI: 1.37-8.19). Moreover, experiencing musculoskeletal pain (OR = 2.41 95% CI: 1.77-3.27) increased the likelihood of sickness absence with greater odds when it is a back pain (OR = 3.05; 95% CI: 1.66-5.62). Increased age, physical activity, and sleep were not associated with sick leave. CONCLUSION: Several variables were statistically associated with the occurrence of sickness absenteeism. One primary concern is the limited research in this area despite alarming rates of sick leave in healthcare. More research is required to identify predictors of sickness absence, and thereby, implement preventative measures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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