Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29669966›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational health2018

Effect of the National Stress Check Program on mental health among workers in Japan: A 1-year retrospective cohort study.

Kotaro Imamura, Yumi Asai, Kazuhiro Watanabe, Akizumi Tsutsumi, Akihito Shimazu, Akiomi Inoue, Hisanori Hiro, Yuko Odagiri, Toru Yoshikawa, Etsuko Yoshikawa and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Educational gradient in physiological risk factors in a workplace: a decomposition analysis of biomarkers.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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.

Kotaro ImamuraDepartment of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo.
Yumi AsaiDepartment of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo.
Kazuhiro WatanabeDepartment of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo.
Akizumi TsutsumiDepartment of Public Health, Kitasato University School of Medicine.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0966-4869
Akihito ShimazuCenter for Human and Social Sciences, Kitasato University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.
Akiomi InoueDepartment of Public Health, Kitasato University School of Medicine.
Hisanori HiroDepartment of Mental Health, Institute of Industrial Ecological Sciences, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan.
Yuko OdagiriDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Tokyo Medical University.
Toru YoshikawaNational Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan.
Etsuko YoshikawaFaculty of Nursing, Japanese Red Cross College of Nursing.
Norito KawakamiDepartment of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis retrospective cohort study evaluated the impact of the Stress Check Program, a recently introduced national policy and program aimed at reducing psychological distress among Japanese workers.

methodsA baseline survey was conducted from November 2015 to February 2016, the period when Japan began enforcing the Stress Check Program. A one-year follow-up survey was conducted in December 2016. In the follow-up survey, two exposure variables were collected: having taken the annual stress survey, and experiencing an improvement in the psychosocial work environment. Psychological distress was assessed using the Brief Job Stress Questionnaire (BJSQ) at baseline and 1-year follow-up. The two exposure variables were used to define four groups: "Neither", "Stress survey (SS) only", "Psychosocial work environment improvement (WI) only", and "Both". BJSQ results were analyzed using repeated measures general linear modeling (GLM).

resultsThe study included 2,492 participants: 1,342 in the "Neither" group, 1,009 in the "SS only" group, 76 in the "WI only" group, and 65 in the "Both" group. Overall time-group interaction effects were not significant. The "Both" group showed significantly greater improvements in psychological distress than the "Neither" group (p = 0.02) at the 1-year follow-up, although the effect size was small (d = -0.14).

conclusionsCombination of the annual stress survey and improvement in psychosocial work environment may have been effective in reducing psychological distress in workers, although the effect size was small.

Indexed as

Health SurveysMental HealthOccupational HealthAdolescentAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedOccupational StressProgram EvaluationRetrospective StudiesWorkplaceYoung AdultMental healthNational policyPsychosocial work environment improvementStress checkWorkers

Identifiers

PMID29669966
PMCPMC6078839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.