What Are the Determinants of the Sex/Gender Difference in Duration of Work Absence for Musculoskeletal Disorders? A Mixed-Studies Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) contribute to work disability arising from personal and work-related physical, organizational and psychosocial factors that often differentially affect men and women. We aimed to identify determinants of the sex/gender difference in duration of MSD work absence through a mixed-studies systematic review. Methods: We synthesized evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach adapted to prognostic studies and meta-ethnography for qualitative studies, followed by a mixed synthesis. Results: Twenty-six quantitative and four qualitative studies contributed to the evidence synthesis. Only two of the twenty-six quantitative studies addressed the sex/gender gap directly, compared to three of the four qualitative studies. Most other quantitative studies provided evidence from sex/gender-stratified analyses of determinants of MSD disability. The synthesis of qualitative studies suggested that domestic strain, less access to modified work/retraining, and gender-biased attitudes of health and insurance system gatekeepers hindered women’s return to work. Prognostic factors in women supporting this conclusion from quantitative studies included the combination “working ≥ 40 h/week and having dependents” and low supervisor support. The mixed synthesis yielded a conceptual model of hypothesized determinants of the sex/gender difference in MSD work disability that integrates factors from personal, workplace, healthcare and insurance–disability management spheres, influenced by the larger sociopolitical, cultural and macroeconomic context. Conclusions: Studies directly addressing the sex/gender gap in MSD disability are needed. These can be informed by the proposed model. Practitioners and policymakers can build upon the model to develop and implement MSD prevention and rehabilitation interventions tailored to the needs of men and women to reduce sex/gender disparities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".