ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Emotional Demand and Mental Health in Korean Employees.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Gender Differences of Mediating Effect of Body Mass Index Between Perceived Control and Depressive Symptoms in Korean Workers.Psychiatry investigation · 2026Article
- Association of workforce participation with depression among US older adults: results from NHANES 2005-2018.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Association between high emotional demand at work, burnout symptoms, and sleep disturbance among Korean workers: a cross-sectional mediation analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- High Emotional Demands at Work and Poor Mental Health in Client-Facing Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmotional demand (ED) at work is related to mental health in the general workforce, not just emotional workers. We investigated the relationships between ED and mental health outcomes, including distress, depressive symptoms (DS), experience of depression (DE), and suicidal ideation (SI) on the entire general workforce using nationally representative data.
methods5787 full-time employees were analyzed using cross-sectional design with the fourth Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (K-NHANES IV). Work-related psychosocial factors and mental health status were measured through face-to-face interviews. Multi-stage and stratified survey designs were considered in the analysis, and the mental health effects of ED were analyzed using multivariable logistic analysis. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was conducted to investigate increases in the relationship between the severity of ED and mental health outcomes.
resultsThe subjects comprised 3089 men and 2698 women. ED was reported by 36.7% of men and 39.3% of women. The estimated prevalence of distress was 27.5% in men and 34.6% in women. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of ED for distress were 2.62 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.10-3.28) for men and 2.57 (95% CI = 1.92-3.45) for women. DS was significantly related to ED (men: OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.18-2.50; women: OR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.33-2.74). ED was also significant psychosocial risk factor for DE (men: OR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.07-3.29; women: OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.15-2.75) and SI (men: OR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.11-2.41; women: OR = 2.31, 95% CI = 1.63-3.28).
conclusionsED was a risk factor for distress, DS, DE, and SI in the general workforce. Legal and social safety networks should be constructed for workers whose emotions may be hidden at work, as well as workers in emotion-related fields.
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.