ArticleJournal of medical systems2017
Development and Validation of a Health and Work Survey Based on the Rasch Model among Portuguese Workers.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychosocial Risk Factors and Burnout Among Teachers: Can Emotional Intelligence Make a Difference?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Disclosing Strain: How Psychosocial Risk Factors Influence Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Healthcare Workers Preceding and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Healthcare Workers' Mental Health in Pandemic Times: The Predict Role of Psychosocial Risks.Safety and health at work · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of an Interdisciplinary Worker's Health Approach Instrument (IWHAI).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Healthcare Workers: Occupational Health Promotion and Patient Safety.Journal of medical systems · 2018Article
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
The purpose of this study was to develop the Health and Work Survey (INSAT) and examine the validity of the discomfort rating scale. Data were collected from 706 Portuguese workers from six economic sectors with the support of the Health and Work Survey (INSAT - Inquérito Saúde e Trabalho). The INSAT is a self-administered questionnaire to assessing working conditions, health and wellbeing, and to provide information to the occupational health systems in the organisations. For the survey instrument validation, the Rasch Partial Credit Model (PCM) was used to analyse item fit statistics. From the application of PCM, Person Separation Reliability was obtained (0.8761) and the value can be considered very good (>0.8). From the statistical analysis, the Overall Model fit information, given by Outfit Mean square/Infit Mean square, is between 0.5 and 1.5, meaning "Productive for measurement" and "acceptable fit overall". The INSAT items can generate predictable response patterns. We recommend that the INSAT discomfort rating scale and some other items should be reviewed in future works. In any event, this tool proves to be useful in assessing the relationship between work and health and in evaluating key main risk factors, helping to prevent problems and improving occupational health systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28357657What 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.