Preliminary Results of a Workplace Health Promotion Program in Higher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Employees of higher education have an increased risk for stress, burnout, and turnover. Workplace Health Promotion (WHP) programs have been shown to improve quality of life, reduce individual health risks, improve morale, reduce health care costs, and increase employee retention. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a WHP initiative on employee intent to stay, life/work balance, and work-related quality of life. Methods: This study employed a cross-sectional design at a Midwestern university. All faculty and staff were invited to participate in an Employee Wellness Hour, which allowed them to take an additional hour per day to participate in wellness-related activities. Those who chose to participate were required to track their wellness activity on a weekly basis in Qualtrics and invited to participate in a survey examining their intent to stay, life/work balance, and work-related quality of life. Analyses were conducted to determine whether participation in the Employee Wellness Hour had an impact on employee intent to stay, their life/work balance, and work-related quality of life. Results: Results indicated that those who participated in the Employee Wellness Hour were more likely to stay with their current employer and rated their working conditions more positively. Conclusions: The cost of employee turnover is immense, making it imperative that employers develop and implement innovative solutions to retain employees and improve working conditions. This study provided preliminary evidence that WHP programs can have a positive impact on retention and working conditions among those employed in institutions of higher education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".