MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292220060 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0273218

A systematic review of evidence on employment transitions and weight change by gender in ageing populations

2022· review· en· W4292220060 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander C. T. Tam, Veronica Steck, Sahib Janjua, Ting Yu Liu, Rachel A. Murphy, Wei Zhang, Annalijn Conklin

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsObesityGerontologyWorkforceMedicineDemographyWeight changeWeight gainSystematic reviewWeight lossMEDLINEBody weightPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Becoming unemployed is associated with poorer health, including weight gain. Middle- and older-age adults are a growing segment of workforces globally, but they are also more vulnerable to changes to employment status, especially during economic shocks. Expected workforce exits over the next decade may exacerbate both the obesity epidemic and the economic burden of obesity. This review extends current knowledge on economic correlates of health to assess whether employment transitions impact body weight by sex/gender among middle-aged and older adults. METHODS: Eight bibliometric databases were searched between June and July 2021, supplemented by hand-searches, with no restriction on publication date or country. Longitudinal studies, or reviews, were eligible when examining body weight as a function of employment status change in adults ≥50 years. Data extraction and quality appraisal used predefined criteria; reported findings were analysed by narrative synthesis. RESULTS: We screened 6,001 unique abstracts and identified 12 articles that met inclusion criteria. All studies examined retirement; of which two also examined job-loss. Overall, studies showed that retirement led to weight gain or no difference in weight change compared to non-retirees; however, reported effects were not consistent for either women or men across studies or for both women and men within a study. Reported effects also differed by occupation: weight gain was more commonly observed among retirees from physical occupations but not among retirees from sedentary occupations. Few studies assessed the role of health behaviours; sleep was the least studied. Most studies were medium quality. CONCLUSIONS: Existing studies do not provide a clear enough picture of how employment transitions affect body weight. Firm conclusions on the impact of employment transitions on weight cannot be made without further high-quality evidence that considers the role of gender, job-type, other health behaviours, and other transitions, like job-loss.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0170.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.674
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicEmployment and Welfare Studies→French-language works237,207→