MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6902581561 · doi:10.71878/jpah.2025.1204213

The effect of physical fitness level on mir-155 gene expression mediated by job stress in Shiraz firefighters

2025· article· en· W6902581561 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Activity and Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical fitnessJob stressAffect (linguistics)Mental healthGene expressionExpression (computer science)Physical health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Firefighters are increasingly exposed to factors that affect their physical and mental health. The aim of present study was examined the effect of physical fitness level on mir-155 gene expression mediated by job stress in Shiraz firefighters. Material & Methods: Twenty firefighters volunteered to participate in this study. To measure the physical fitness of the subjects, the Physical Fitness Index Questionnaire (Sharkey, 1990) was used, and to assess the level of job stress, the Job Stress Questionnaire (Elliott, 1994) was used. The expression of the mir-155 gene was also measured by Real-time PCR. Smart PLS software was used to analyze the data, with a significance level of p<0.05. Results: The results showed that the level of physical fitness and job stress did not have a direct and significant effect on the expression of the mir-155 gene in Shiraz firefighters, and the level of physical fitness also did not have a direct and significant effect on their job stress. Conclusion: These results indicate that to improve the health and performance of firefighters, attention should be paid to other factors that may have a greater impact on gene expression and job stress.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Activity and HealthSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207