ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
The Assessment of Psychosocial Work Conditions and Their Relationship to Well-Being: A Multi-Study Report.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. 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.
- Correlations between well-being of nurses and psychosocial working conditions - a descriptive cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- An Integrated Approach to Workplace Mental Health: A Scoping Review of Instruments That Can Assist Organizations with Implementation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Antecedents, outcomes and measurement of work related-cognition in non-work time: A multistudy report using the work-related rumination questionnaire in two languages.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Article
- COPSOQ III in Germany: validation of a standard instrument to measure psychosocial factors at work.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this multi-study report is to present a questionnaire that enables researchers and practitioners to assess and evaluate psychosocial risks related to well-being. In Study 1, we conducted a cross-sectional online-survey in 15 German companies from 2016 to 2017 to verify factor- and criterion-related validity. Data consisted of 1151 employee self-ratings. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in an eight-factor structure (CFI = 0.902, RMSEA = 0.058, and SRMR = 0.070). All scales held to excellent internal consistency values (α = 0.65-0.90) and were related significantly to well-being (
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.