MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285612055 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269498

Occupational stress in industry setting in Benin 2019: A cross-sectional study

2022· article· en· W4285612055 on OpenAlexaff
Mênonli Adjobimey, Vikkey Hinson, Rose Mikponhoué, Esdras Hountohotegbè, Elvyre Klikpo, Ibrahim Mama Cissé, Amelée Adjogou, Véronique Dossougbété, Jonathon R. Campbell, Paul Ayélo, Dismand Stéphan Houinato

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOccupational stressCross-sectional studyLogistic regressionEpidemiologyEnvironmental healthPsychosocialOccupational safety and healthDemographyOccupational medicineGerontologyOccupational exposureInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Occupational stress is a psychosocial risk in the workplace. Working conditions in industrial settings may lead to occupational stress. In Benin, however, there is little epidemiological data on occupational stress in industrial settings. We aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with occupational stress in industrial settings in Benin in 2019. METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study conducted from January 31 to April 11, 2019, among 15 cotton ginning plants. Sampling was exhaustive for permanent workers and stratified in clusters by shift for occasional cotton gin workers. Data were collected through Karasek and Siegrist questionnaires. Data analysis was performed using R software. Binary multivariable logistic regression was performed. The significance level was p < 0.05. RESULTS: Of 1883 workers included, 90.8% were male. The median age was 38 years (IQR: 28 years to 49 years). The prevalence of occupational stress was 77.7% (95% CI: 75.8-79.6). Psychological demand was high in 93.0% of workers and 83.9% had low decision latitude. Among the workers, 16.3% had low social support and 89.9% had a low recognition score at work. Factors associated with occupational stress were: being an occasional vs. permanent worker (aOR 6.43, 95% CI 4.18 to 9.88); age less than 38 years (aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.76); high intensity physical activity at work (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.73); working in production vs. administration (aOR 1.59, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.45); spending fewer than 4 years at the current work location (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.44); and scoring low for recognition at work (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.23). Noise exposure and being a shift worker were significant in univariable analysis, but not multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Occupational stress is very common among workers in industrial settings. The implementation and evaluation of preventive measures against these risk factors is necessary.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicWorkplace Health and Well-being→French-language works237,207→