ArticleBMJ open2019
Within-individual analysis of pain and sickness absence among employees from low and high occupational classes: a record linkage study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. 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.
- Balancing roles and well-being in later life: insights from Chinese older women's life course.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Separate and joint associations of chronic pain, multisite pain and mental health with sickness absence among younger employees: a register based longitudinal study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Contributions of childhood adversities to chronic pain among mid-life employees.Scandinavian journal of public health · 2022Article
- A longitudinal study of changes in interactional justice and subsequent short-term sickness absence among municipal employees.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPain is linked to an increased risk of sickness absence (SA); however, the extent to which unmeasured time-invariant differences explain this association is yet unknown. Therefore, we determined the within-individual associations between pain and short-term (in the survey year) and long-term (2 years following the survey years) SA risk in high and low occupational classes while controlling for the potential bias due to unobservable time-invariant characteristics.
methodsThe Helsinki Health Study data consisting of midlife public sector employees with mailed surveys from up to four time points, and SA record linkage were used (3983 persons). The within-individual estimates were calculated using hybrid negative binomial regression models.
resultsAcute/subacute pain was associated with a 13% increase in the rate of short-term SA days (incidence rate ratio 1.13 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.27]), while the association was somewhat stronger for chronic pain (1.32 [1.19-1.47]). For the employees in the low occupational class, these associations were robust (1.29 [1.10-1.50] for acute/subacute and 1.43 [1.23-1.66] for chronic pain), whereas only chronic pain was associated with SA among those in the high occupational class (1.25 [1.08-1.46]). Chronic pain was also associated with SA days in the long term without occupational class differences. Similar results were obtained for multisite pain (pain in several locations).
conclusionsThese results indicate that particularly chronic and multisite pain have a within-individual link to SA but ignoring unobservable differences between those reporting pain and those not might yield overstated effect sizes. Pain might have a different relation to SA in low and high occupational classes.
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.