ArticlePloS one2018
Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire - A validation study using the Job Demand-Resources model.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of sickness absence among employees with common mental disorders in Sweden- a longitudinal study.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- Behind closed doors: a cross-sectional survey on the health and working conditions of migrant live-in care workers in Germany.European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Psychometric validation of the Czech Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ III): long, middle, and screening versions in a nationwide sample.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Streamlining psychosocial risk assessment: An exploratory adaptation of the COPSOQ III for Flemish healthcare workers.PloS one · 2026Article
- Job demands and general health of nursing staff in German nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: the buffering effect of job resources.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Does type of provider matter for staff well-being? a cross-sectional study of residential care home workers' job demands and resources.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Psychosocial Work Factors, Job Stress, and Self-Rated Health Among Hotel Housekeepers.Workplace health & safety · 2025Article
- Article
- Psychosocial work environment beyond WEIRD: meta-analytic and psychometric evidence on the Job Content Questionnaire.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Psychosocial hazards and work-life balance: the role of workplace conflict, rivalry, and harassment in Latvia.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Associations between job demand-control-support and high burnout risk among physicians in Sweden: a cross-sectional study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Exploring work ability, psychosocial job demands and resources of employees in low-skilled jobs: a German cross-sectional study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Job satisfaction, professional competence, and self-efficacy: a multicenter cross-sectional study among registered nurses in Sweden and Norway.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Effect of role overload on missed nursing care in China: The role of work addiction and leader-member exchange.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Single and cumulative exposure to psychosocial work conditions and mental health among young adults.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Factors related to a successful professional development for specialist nurses in surgical care: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2023Article
- Do influence at work and possibilities for development mitigate the impact of job demands for workers with and without depression.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2023Article
- The Predictive Validity of the Danish Psychosocial Work Environment Questionnaire With Regard to Onset of Depressive Disorders and Long-Term Sickness Absence.Annals of work exposures and health · 2023Article
- How job demands and job resources contribute to our overall subjective well-being.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Affective work rumination as a mediator of the reciprocal relationships between job demands and exhaustion.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims at investigating the nomological validity of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ II) by using an extension of the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model with aspects of work ability as outcome. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study design is cross-sectional. All staff working at public dental organizations in four regions of Sweden were invited to complete an electronic questionnaire (75% response rate, n = 1345). The questionnaire was based on COPSOQ II scales, the Utrecht Work Engagement scale, and the one-item Work Ability Score in combination with a proprietary item. The data was analysed by Structural Equation Modelling.
resultsThis study contributed to the literature by showing that: A) The scale characteristics were satisfactory and the construct validity of COPSOQ instrument could be integrated in the JD-R framework; B) Job resources arising from leadership may be a driver of the two processes included in the JD-R model; and C) Both the health impairment and motivational processes were associated with WA, and the results suggested that leadership may impact WA, in particularly by securing task resources.
conclusionIn conclusion, the nomological validity of COPSOQ was supported as the JD-R model-can be operationalized by the instrument. This may be helpful for transferral of complex survey results and work life theories to practitioners in the field.
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.