MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411080809 · doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000003449

Predictors of Physical and Mental Health-Related Quality of Life in Tunisian Workers With Type 2 Diabetes

2025· article· en· W4411080809 on OpenAlexaff
Ines Rassas, Noura Bel Hadj, H. Marmouch, Waad Kilani, Irtyah Merchaoui, Aouatef Mahfoudh, Charfeddine Amri, Mohamed Adnène Henchi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsBibliographical Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOverweightQuality of life (healthcare)Socioeconomic statusType 2 diabetesMental healthObesityDiabetes mellitusGerontologyCross-sectional studyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPopulationPsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to identify demographic, medical, and occupational determinants of health-related physical and mental quality of life (QoL) of workers with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Tunisia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed among a sample of workers with T2D. QoL and functioning at work were assessed through the World Health Organisation Quality of Life-Bref (WHOQOL-BREF) and the work-role functioning questionnaires, respectively. RESULTS: Predictors of impaired physical health were high body mass index ( P = 0.001; β = -4; 95% CI = [-12; -2.3]), high number of weekly worked hours ( P = 0.001; β = -3.2; 95% CI = [-4.5; 0.8]), and macroangiopathic complications ( P = 0.001; β = -4.4; 95% CI = [-13; -2.1]). Psychological domain decreased with high body mass index ( P = 0.001; β = -3.6; 95% CI = [-4.1; -0.03]) and low socioeconomic status ( P = 0.001; β = -3.9; 95% CI = [-7.6; -0.27]). High functioning at work increased both physical ( P = 0.001; β = 5.3; 95% CI = [3.1; 5.8]) and mental well-being ( P = 0.001; β = 4.7; 95% CI = [1.2; 4.9]). CONCLUSIONS: Improving the QoL of workers with T2D through intervention programs that involve reducing overweight/obesity, chronic diabetic complications, and hazardous work environments is warranted.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207