Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33961688›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Work-life conflict and cardiovascular health: 5-year follow-up of the Gutenberg Health Study.

Janice Hegewald, Karla Romero Starke, Susan Garthus-Niegel, Andreas Schulz, Matthias Nübling, Ute Latza, Sylvia Jankowiak, Falk Liebers, Karin Rossnagel, Merle Riechmann-Wolf and 9 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Janice HegewaldInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3388-161X
Karla Romero StarkeInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Germany.
Susan Garthus-NiegelInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Germany.
Andreas SchulzUniversity Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Matthias NüblingFFAW: The Freiburg Research Centre for Occupational Sciences, Freiburg, Germany.
Ute LatzaDivision Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Sylvia JankowiakDivision Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Falk LiebersDivision Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Karin RossnagelDivision Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Merle Riechmann-WolfInstitute for Teachers' Health, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7474-3219
Stephan LetzelInstitute of Occupational, Social, Environmental Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Natalie ArnoldCenter for Cardiology I, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Manfred BeutelDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Mainz, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Emilio GianicoloInstitute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Norbert PfeifferDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center Mainz, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Karl LacknerInstitute for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Thomas MünzelCenter for Cardiology I, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Philipp WildDepartment of Medicine 2, Preventive Cardiology and Preventive Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Andreas SeidlerInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEFederal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · DEChemnitz University of Technology · DENorwegian Institute of Public Health · NOResearch Centre for Applied System Safety and Industrial Medicine · DEUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWork-life conflicts (WLC) may impact health, but few studies prospectively consider the impact of WLC on objective outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. Using data from the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS), we examined if WLC at baseline was associated with an increased five-year incidence of cardiovascular events (myocardial infarct, stroke, atrial fibrillation, peripheral artery disease, coronary artery disease, chronic heart failure, sudden cardiac death). We also considered if WLC was associated with incident hypertension and arterial stiffness and if the effects of WLC on cardiovascular health differ for men and women.

methodsA working subsample of the 15,010 GHS cohort participants completed the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, which included five "work-privacy conflict" questions at baseline and at the five-year follow-up. Relative risks for incident hypertension due to increased WLC at baseline (WLC scores exceeding 60 out of 100) were estimated with Poisson regression in the subgroup of participants without hypertension at baseline (n = 2426). Categories of WLC at baseline and follow-up were also used to examine the risk of hypertension due to chronic/recurrent WLC. In this subgroup, we also examined the association between WLC as a continuous score ranging from 0 to 100 with change to arterial stiffness after five years using linear regression. Hazard ratios were estimated for incident cardiovascular events in a larger subsample of participants without prevalent cardiovascular disease at baseline (n = 3698) using Cox regression. We used various multivariable regression models to adjust for sex, age, socioeconomic status, occupational, household, and cardiovascular risk factors.

resultsWe found no association between WLC and incident hypertension or increased arterial stiffness. The fully-adjusted relative risk for WLC >60 at baseline and hypertension was 0.93 (95% 0.74-1.17). The risk of hypertension due to chronic/recurrent WLC >60 was increased but not statistically significant (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.83-1.54). Overall, hazard ratios for incident cardiovascular events were also not increased. However, stratifying the results by sex resulted in a hazard ratio of 1.47 (95% CI 0.54-3.98) for incident cardiovascular disease among women in the fully adjusted model.

conclusionsAlthough our results were not statistically significant, they indicate that WLC is negatively impacting the cardiovascular health of women. While these results need to be confirmed with additional research and a longer follow-up, interventions to prevent WLC will promote health and could be especially beneficial for women.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCardiovascular SystemFemaleHealth PromotionHumansHypertensionIncidenceMaleRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesVascular Stiffness

Identifiers

PMID33961688
PMCPMC8104925
OpenAlexW3159053754

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.