Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28586383›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

At-risk and intervention thresholds of occupational stress using a visual analogue scale.

Frédéric Dutheil, Bruno Pereira, Farès Moustafa, Geraldine Naughton, François-Xavier Lesage, Céline Lambert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing 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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Efficacy of Nortriptyline and Migraine Lifestyle Modifications in Vestibular Migraine Management.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Frédéric DutheilUniversité Clermont Auvergne, CNRS, LaPSCo, Physiological and Psychosocial Stress, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, Occupational and Preventive Medicine, WittyFit, Clermont-Ferrand, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1468-6029
Bruno PereiraCHU Clermont-Ferrand, University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, the Clinical Research and Innovation Direction, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Farès MoustafaCHU Clermont-Ferrand, University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, Emergency department, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Geraldine NaughtonAustralian Catholic University, Faculty of Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
François-Xavier LesageUniversity of Montpellier, Laboratory Epsylon EA 4556, Dynamic of Human Abilities & Health Behaviors, CHU Montpellier, University Hospital of Montpellier, Occupational and Preventive Medicine, Montpellier, France.
Céline LambertCHU Clermont-Ferrand, University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, the Clinical Research and Innovation Direction, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe visual analogue scale (VAS) is widely used in clinical practice by occupational physicians to assess perceived stress in workers. However, a single cut-off (black-or-white decision) inadequately discriminates between workers with and without stress. We explored an innovative statistical approach to distinguish an at-risk population among stressed workers, and to establish a threshold over which an action is urgently required, via the use of two cut-offs.

methodsParticipants were recruited during annual work medical examinations by a random sample of workers from five occupational health centres. We previously proposed a single cut-off of VAS stress in comparison with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS14). Similar methodology was used in the current study, along with a gray zone approach. The lower limit of the gray zone supports sensitivity ("at-risk" threshold; interpreted as requiring closer surveillance) and the upper limit supports specificity (i.e. "intervention" threshold-emergency action required).

resultsWe included 500 workers (49.6% males), aged 40±11 years, with a PSS14 score of 3.8±1.4 and a VAS score of 4.0±2.4. Using a receiver operating characteristic curve and the PSS cut-off score of 7.2, the optimal VAS threshold was 6.8 (sensitivity = 0.89, specificity = 0.87). The lower and upper thresholds of the gray zone were 5 and 8.2, respectively.

conclusionsWe identified two clinically relevant cut-offs on the VAS of stress: a first cut-off of 5.0 for an at-risk population, and a second cut-off of 8.2 over which an action is urgently required. Future investigations into the relationships between this upper threshold and deleterious events are required.

Indexed as

Visual Analog ScaleAdultEmploymentFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsStress, PsychologicalSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID28586383
PMCPMC5460813

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.