Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33914162›Full record

ArticleInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2021

Reasons for presenteeism in different occupational branches in Sweden: a population based cross-sectional study.

Staffan Marklund, Klas Gustafsson, Gunnar Bergström, Constanze Leineweber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Explaining presenteeism behaviour with the theory of planned behaviour - a longitudinal study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cluster Headache and the Comprehension Paradox.SN comprehensive clinical medicine · 2022
    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.

Staffan MarklundDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Insurance Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Klas GustafssonDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Insurance Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. klas.gustafsson@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-0025-1091
Gunnar BergströmDepartment of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
Constanze LeineweberStress Research Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the prevalence and reasons for presenteeism in occupations in three branches defined as employees handling people, handling things or handling symbols.

methodA cross-sectional population-based cohort study was conducted. The study group was drawn from a representative sample (n = 6230) aged 16-64, who had been interviewed in 2015 or in 2017 for the Swedish Work Environment Surveys (SWES). The odds ratios (ORs) stratified by occupational category for reasons of presenteeism, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), were estimated using binomial multiple logistic regression analysis.

resultsThe study showed that presenteeism was more common among employees handling people (74%), when compared to employees handling things (65%) or handling symbols (70%). The most common reason for presenteeism among employees handling people was "I do not want to burden my colleagues", while "Because nobody else can carry out my responsibilities" was most common in the other two categories. After control for socio-demography, work environments and health, the differences in reasons mostly remained significant between the three occupational categories.

conclusionThe differences between occupational categories are important for prevalence and reasons for presenteeism. As presenteeism affects the future health of employees and the productivity of the work unit, attempts to reduce presenteeism may be important. Because the reasons vary between occupations, customized preventive measures should be applied in different occupational settings. Among employees handling people, covering up for absence in work team is relevant, while among employees handling symbols and handling things the corresponding focus could be on shared responsibilities for specific tasks.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPresenteeismSurveys and QuestionnairesSwedenWorkplaceYoung AdultCross sectional studyEmployment sectorOccupational branchesPresenteeism

Identifiers

PMID33914162
PMCPMC8292261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.