Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25340520›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Optimal cutoff values of WHO-HPQ presenteeism scores by ROC analysis for preventing mental sickness absence in Japanese prospective cohort.

Tomoko Suzuki, Koichi Miyaki, Yasuharu Sasaki, Yixuan Song, Akizumi Tsutsumi, Norito Kawakami, Akihito Shimazu, Masaya Takahashi, Akiomi Inoue, Sumiko Kurioka and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Tomoko SuzukiDepartment of Clinical Research and Informatics, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Public Health, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan.
Koichi MiyakiDepartment of Clinical Research and Informatics, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yasuharu SasakiDepartment of Clinical Research and Informatics, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yixuan SongDepartment of Clinical Research and Informatics, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Akizumi TsutsumiDepartment of Public Health, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan.
Norito KawakamiDepartment of Mental Health, Tokyo University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Akihito ShimazuDepartment of Mental Health, Tokyo University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Masaya TakahashiHealth Administration and Psychosocial Factor Research Group, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Kanagawa, Japan.
Akiomi InoueDepartment of Mental Health, Institute of Industrial Ecological Sciences, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Fukuoka, Japan.
Sumiko KuriokaDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Fukuoka, Japan.
Takuro ShimboDepartment of Clinical Research and Informatics, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSickness absence due to mental disease in the workplace has become a global public health problem. Previous studies report that sickness presenteeism is associated with sickness absence. We aimed to determine optimal cutoff scores for presenteeism in the screening of the future absences due to mental disease.

methodsA prospective study of 2195 Japanese employees from all areas of Japan was conducted. Presenteeism and depression were measured by the validated Japanese version of the World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (WHO-HPQ) and K6 scale, respectively. Absence due to mental disease across a 2-year follow-up was surveyed using medical certificates obtained for work absence. Socioeconomic status was measured via a self-administered questionnaire. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was used to determine optimal cutoff scores for absolute and relative presenteeism in relation to the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity.

resultsThe AUC values for absolute and relative presenteeism were 0.708 (95% CI, 0.618-0.797) and 0.646 (95% CI, 0.546-0.746), respectively. Optimal cutoff scores of absolute and relative presenteeism were 40 and 0.8, respectively. With multivariate adjustment, cohort participants with our proposal cutoff scores for absolute and relative presenteeism were significantly more likely to be absent due to mental disease (OR = 4.85, 95% CI: 2.20-10.73 and OR = 5.37, 95% CI: 2.42-11.93, respectively). The inclusion or exclusion of depressive symptoms (K6≥13) at baseline in the multivariate adjustment did not influence the results.

conclusionsOur proposed optimal cutoff scores of absolute and relative presenteeism are 40 and 0.8, respectively. Participants who scored worse than the cutoff scores for presenteeism were significantly more likely to be absent in future because of mental disease. Our findings suggest that the utility of presenteeism in the screening of sickness absence due to mental disease would help prevent such an absence.

Indexed as

PresenteeismAbsenteeismAdultAgedArea Under CurveFemaleHumansJapanLongitudinal StudiesMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioProspective StudiesROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID25340520
PMCPMC4207778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.