Cross-sectional study of association between social support, job strain and cardiovascular disease
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
This cross-sectional study examines the association between workplace social support, job strain, and cardiovascular disease prevalence ratio and rate in a random sample of 13,779 in Sweden's working population which contains both males and females. Self-reported psychological work control, job demands, and workplace social support combined, is greater than multiplicatively relations to cardiovascular disease prevalence. Modified demand-control-support model is used for calculating prevalence ratio and prevalence rate. In comparison to the reference group, employees have high expectations, little control, and limited social support, demonstrates an age-adjusted prevalence ratio of 2.17 with a 95% confidence interval from 1.32 to 3.56. After controlling for age and 11 other potential confounding factors, the PRs for this group was around 2.00. By this study, when social support falls, cardiovascular disease prevalence rate and ratio rise in each combination. Limitations of the data accuracy and methodology weakness of cross-sectional design are discussed in this study.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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