MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417167230 · doi:10.3917/spub.254.0035

Fréquences d’exposition aux principaux facteurs de risque biomécaniques d’usure professionnelle chez les femmes et les hommes dans la cohorte CONSTANCES

2025· article· fr· W4417167230 on OpenAlexaff
Gwladys Morvan, Julie Bodin, Marie-Ève Major, Natacha Fouquet, L. Bénézet, Hanifa Bouziri, M. Zins, Marcel Goldberg, Yves Roquelaure

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Publique · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersÉcole des Hautes Études en Santé Publique
KeywordsWork (physics)Risk factorSocial risk

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction:As part of the 2023 pension reform in France, a fund for the prevention of occupational wear and tear (fonds pour la prvention de l'usure professionnelle, FIPU) was set up to prevent premature aging and musculoskeletal disorders.In accordance with French law, the FIPU takes into consideration exposure to three biomechanical criteria: manual handling of loads, painful positions at work, and mechanical vibrations.The aim of our study was to identify the occupational categories most exposed to the three FIPU criteria, as well as to another biomechanical risk factor for musculoskeletal disorders: repetitive work. Methods:The analyses are based on cross-sectional data from the French CONSTANCES cohort (Consultants des centres d'examens de sant).Exposure to the three FIPU criteria and to repetitive work were described according to occupational cate- gories (based on the French nomenaculture for occupational groups [Familles professionnelles, FAPs]).Results: Among men, the FAPs most exposed to at least one of the three FIPU criteria were skilled construction workers (structural and finishing work: 95.8% and 88.1%) and metal workers (86.0%).Among women, the FAPs most impacted were home help personnel and cleaners (80.3%), assistant nurses (79.2%), and childcare assistants (77.1%).Adding the repetitive work factor increased the proportion of exposed workers, particularly among women, and highlighted new occupations, not obtained with the FIPU criteria alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.354 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté PubliqueSame topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207