ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2015
Quality of Work: Validation of a New Instrument in Three Languages.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 countermeasures at the workplace, psychological well-being, and mental health - a nationally representative latent class analysis of Luxembourgish employees.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2022Article
- The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectiveA new instrument to measure quality of work was developed in three languages (German, French and Luxembourgish) and validated in a study of employees working in Luxembourg. METHODS AND
resultsA representative sample (n = 1529) was taken and exploratory factor analysis revealed a six-factor solution for the 21-item instrument (satisfaction and respect, mobbing, mental strain at work, cooperation, communication and feedback, and appraisal). Reliability analysis showed satisfying reliability for all six factors and the total questionnaire. In order to examine the construct validity of the new instrument, regression analyses were conducted to test whether the instrument predicted work characteristics’ influence on three components of well-being -- burnout, psychological stress and maladaptive coping behaviors.
conclusionThe present validation offers a trilingual inventory for measuring quality of work that may be used, for example, as an assessment tool or for testing the effectiveness of interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.