Impacts of arthritis on work performance, functioning and activities of daily living using the Canadian community health survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with arthritis often face significant challenges in their activities of daily living and work performance, resulting in substantial effects on both their personal and professional lives. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether workers with arthritis within the Canadian working-age population are more or less likely to miss work, sustain injuries, or experience activity limitations compared to those without arthritis. METHODS: The analysis utilized data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, focusing on employed individuals over 20 from two datasets: 2015-2016 (n = 107,705) and 2017-2018 (n = 112,947). Logistic regression examined occupational health factors, while bivariate analyses via chi-squared tests (p < 0.01) filtered variables and Tukey's HSD was used for post hoc analysis (p < 0.05). Multinomial models addressed complex responses, and Wald's test compared differences between males and females. RESULTS: Individuals with arthritis (n = 27,720) were more likely to miss work, experience difficulties in daily functioning and report injury compared to their non-arthritis counterparts. Women with arthritis were also more likely to face difficulties in daily functioning and report joblessness. Men with arthritis were more likely to report work absences but less likely to report injury compared to both women and non-arthritis men. CONCLUSION: Despite individuals with arthritis being heavily impacted in terms of functionality, there is a disconnect between accommodations provided and usage. Further research on inclusive accommodations (e.g., ergonomic tools and equipment, flexible work arrangements) and self-management strategies that can account for the problems faced by individuals with arthritis need to be established.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".