Belastungen und Gefährdungen bei berufsbedingter Mobilität: eine Tagebuchstudie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stresses and risks in job-related mobility: a diary study Goal: A quarter of full-time workers in Germany are mobile for their work (mobile jobs, weekend commuters and long-distance commuters), which is attributable among other things to the increasing need for a customer- and service-centred approach and to the demand for mobile care for the elderly. In 2012, 139 people died in road traffic whilst going about their business. The consequences of traffic accidents are considerably more serious than those of other occupational accidents and require more time off work. At the same time, they represent a particular challenge for prevention since they mostly happen outside company premises. Methods: The diary study was one of several data collection methods used within the scope of the DGUV-funded project “BestMobil: Work-related mobility – Identification and Testing of Prevention Approaches”. The diary was completed in the morning/before the shift and in the evening/after the shift. It contained questions about the expectations of the day, well-being (before/after), working and driving hours, break duration, psychological and physical stress, conflicts, supporting factors and the short-term consequences of psychological strain. Results: The analysis of the diary entries (pre-test) of n=36 participants from nine companies allows an insight into the daily routine of mobile workers. It provides information on very long working hours with rather short breaks, the most common conflicts, factors that make the day easier for mobile workers and the most frequent psychological and physical complaints. Conclusion: The results of the study show that good time management, which includes good preparation, scheduled breaks and times buffers, has high prevention potential. Keywords: psychological strain – job mobility – car accidents – stress – diary
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.028 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".