Work & life stress experienced by professional workers during the pandemic: a gender-based analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic impacted work and home life exacerbating pre-existing stressors and introducing new ones. These impacts were notably gendered. In this paper, we explore the different work and home life related stressors of professional workers specifically as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic through the gender-based analysis of two pan Canadian surveys: The Canadian Community Health Survey (2019, 2020, 2021) and the Healthy Professional Worker Survey (2021). Analyses revealed high rates of work stress among professional workers compared to other workers and this was particularly notable for women. Work overload emerged as the most frequently selected source of work stress, followed by digital stress, poor work relations, and uncertainty. Similar trends were noted in life stress among professional workers, particularly women. Time pressure consistently stood out as the primary source of non-work stress, caring for children and physical and mental health conditions. These findings can help to develop more targeted and appropriate workplace mental health promotion initiatives that are applicable to professional workers taking gender more fully into consideration.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".