Balancing Demands and Resources for Employees with Cognitive Impairment: A JD-R and STS Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study integrates Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) and Socio-Technical Systems (STS) theories to explore how organizations can effectively support employees with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and young-onset dementia (YOD). Using a constant comparative case study approach, 97 semi-structured interviews were analyzed from two Canadian organizations. Findings highlight that workplace accommodation strategies benefit from empathetic leadership, flexible management, and the integration of digital and non-digital technologies. The study introduces a conceptual model of strain and resilience cycles, emphasizing the role of adaptive structures and sustained feedback loops in fostering workplace resilience. Key organizational enablers include reducing stigma, encouraging self-disclosure, and aligning resources with dynamic employee needs. However, technological and organizational interventions alone are insufficient; a holistic, adaptive approach is required to balance operational efficiency with inclusivity. These findings underscore the importance of integrating human, social, and technological resources to create resilient workplaces that support employees with progressive cognitive impairments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".