MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301322067

[A typology of mental health comorbidity in workplaces: results from the SALVEO study].

2017· article· en· W4301322067 on OpenAlexaffabout
Véronique Dansereau, Nancy Beauregard, Alain Marchand, Pierre Durand

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComorbidityTypologyLatent class modelMental healthPsychiatryNational Comorbidity SurveyBurnoutClinical psychologyCynicismPsychologyLogistic regressionMedicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives The aim of this study consists in describing the nature of mental health comorbidity among workers. Precisely, we seek to examine the presence of concomitant associations between burnout (cynicism, emotional exhaustion, professionnal inefficacy) and psychoactive substance use (heavy episodic drinking, above low-risk drinking guidelines, and psychotropic drug use).Methods The SALVEO study is based on a cross-sectional sample of 1966 workers from the province of Québec, Canada. Latent class analyses were performed in order to identify typical patterns corresponding to distinct forms of mental health comorbidity in the data. Multinomial logistic regressions on latent classes were performed using covariables pertaining to work and non-work domains and workers' individual characteristics.Results Four typical patterns in mental health comorbidity were found: 1- "Severe burnout and psychotropic drug use"; 2- "At risk drinking and cynicism"; 3- "Emotional exhaustion and professional inefficacy"; and 4- "Relatively healthy state". Of all four patterns, the "Severe burnout and psychotropic drug use" pattern presented the highest number of cumulative risks (environmental and individual).Conclusion Comorbidity in mental health is a matter of importance in workplaces from the province of Québec. The severity in the different patterns of mental health comorbidity expressed a cumulative effect of risk factors from the work and non-work domains, as well as individual characteristics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207