Impact of job satisfaction on quality of life in women at the workplace within the cross-sectional Bern Cohort Study 2014 (BeCS-14)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite labor laws, over 614 million workers exceed 48 work hours weekly. Excessive work has been linked to health problems, as has job satisfaction which also affects the individual's quality of life (QoL). This study aims to investigate the impact of job satisfaction on QoL, with a focus on women. Given that occupational stress and job satisfaction have been associated with gynecologic and obstetric outcomes, these findings are of particular relevance to women's health. METHODS: The study utilized data from the Bern Cohort Study 2014, a single-center, cross-sectional, observational trial. During the study, several background parameters were collected, while the IMPULS questionnaire was used to assess job satisfaction, and biofunctional status (BFS) and SF-36 assessed the QoL. The results were analyzed by non-parametric Spearman-Rho test, parametric Pearson correlation, and ANOVA, controlling for age, income, physical activity, sleep, relationship status, and sexual life. RESULTS: Our analysis depicted some interesting correlations. For women, an association between their emotional well-being and their energy and fatigue was established with aspects of their job satisfaction, such as variety, completeness and social environment. For men, an obvious association of job control was noted for their general health, energy and fatigue, and emotional well-being. Contrarily, for women job control had no influence on SF-36 parameters but was positively correlated with the systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure (BFS parameters) revealing a rather opposite perception of job control than for men. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support a link between job satisfaction and QoL. Women consider important factors, such as variety, completeness, and social environment, particularly impacting their emotional well-being and energy levels, whereas for men, job control seems to have the greatest significance. For gynecologists and women's health providers, recognizing the role of occupational factors may help integrate workplace exposures into patient history-taking and counseling, especially in the context of reproductive and pregnancy health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".