Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29520473›Full record

ArticleInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2018

Study of the validity of a job-exposure matrix for the job strain model factors: an update and a study of changes over time.

Isabelle Niedhammer, Allison Milner, Anthony D LaMontagne, Jean-François Chastang

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Isabelle NiedhammerINSERM, U1085, Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health (IRSET), Epidemiology in Occupational Health and Ergonomics (ESTER) Team, 28 rue Roger Amsler, Cedex 74521, 49045, Angers Cedex 1, France. isabelle.niedhammer@inserm.fr.
Allison MilnerCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Anthony D LaMontagneCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Jean-François ChastangINSERM, U1085, Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health (IRSET), Epidemiology in Occupational Health and Ergonomics (ESTER) Team, 28 rue Roger Amsler, Cedex 74521, 49045, Angers Cedex 1, France.

Funding

ANSES, France Grant number: EST-2016/1/49
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe objectives of the study were to construct a job-exposure matrix (JEM) for psychosocial work factors of the job strain model, to evaluate its validity, and to compare the results over time.

methodsThe study was based on national representative data of the French working population with samples of 46,962 employees (2010 SUMER survey) and 24,486 employees (2003 SUMER survey). Psychosocial work factors included the job strain model factors (Job Content Questionnaire): psychological demands, decision latitude, social support, job strain and iso-strain. Job title was defined by three variables: occupation and economic activity coded using standard classifications, and company size. A JEM was constructed using a segmentation method (Classification and Regression Tree-CART) and cross-validation.

resultsThe best quality JEM was found using occupation and company size for social support. For decision latitude and psychological demands, there was not much difference using occupation and company size with or without economic activity. The validity of the JEM estimates was higher for decision latitude, job strain and iso-strain, and lower for social support and psychological demands. Differential changes over time were observed for psychosocial work factors according to occupation, economic activity and company size.

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that company size in addition to occupation may improve the validity of JEMs for psychosocial work factors. These matrices may be time-dependent and may need to be updated over time. More research is needed to assess the validity of JEMs given that these matrices may be able to provide exposure assessments to study a range of health outcomes.

Indexed as

OccupationsSocial SupportAdultAlgorithmsFemaleFranceHumansIndustryInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalOccupational ExposureOccupational Health ServicesOccupational StressRegression AnalysisCompany sizeEconomic activityJob–exposure matrixJob strainJob stressJob titleOccupationPsychosocial work factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.