MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assesment of scientists’ lifestyle and risk factors affecting their professional efficiency

2022· article· en· W4312396973 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Risk Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)CognitionQuarter (Canadian coin)PsychologySubclinical infectionGerontologyMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People involved in scientific research should keep their cognitive status high since this is necessary for preserving their intellectual potential and maintaining their work efficiency. Given that, it seems important to determine what impacts scientific work might have on mental health, to estimate potential disorders and to develop a strategy aimed at preventing cognitive impairments. Our research goals were to perform screening assessment of executive functions, to examine signs of premature ageing and to explore behavioral and social risk factors among Russian researchers. We accomplished a cross-sectional study with 213 researchers employed by state scientific institutions in Moscow participating in it; they were 116 women and 97 men aged from 23 to 78 years (their average age was 45.48 ± 15.33 years). As a result, we established that risk factors causing a decline in professional efficiency were rather frequent among the participants. Probable cognitive disorders were detected in 9.85 % of them and we should note that these disorders were not age-related. We detected signs of senile asthenia in 3.28 % of the participants and senile depression in 2.34 %. Two thirds of the participants had subclinical depression (74.6 %). Only one fifth of the respondents (19.71 %, n = 42) did not have any cognitive impairments, asthenic syndrome, or depression. A quarter of the researchers (25.34 %) were not sufficiently committed to healthy lifestyle. Low physical activity established for 79.3 % of the respondents was the major risk factor; among others, we can mention irrational nutrition, primarily among those researchers who worked with students; poor stress management skills among physicians who combined clinical practice with science; difficulties in interpersonal relationships among people who dealt solely with research. It is necessary to implement corporate programs aimed at prevention and rehabilitations for researchers in order to preserve their scientific activity and professional efficiency as well as to extend their professional longevity

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.335 · 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