Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35599524›Full record

SynthesisWork (Reading, Mass.)2022

A systematic review of working conditions and occupational health in home office.

Milena Sina Wütschert, Diana Romano-Pereira, Livia Suter, Hartmut Schulze, Achim Elfering

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Experiences of working from home: umbrella review.Journal of occupational health · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Distribution of sleep components while working remotely.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Milena Sina WütschertInstitute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Diana Romano-PereiraInstitute of Social Work, University of Applied Science of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Livia SuterInstitute for Research and Development of Collaborative Processes, FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern of Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.
Hartmut SchulzeInstitute for Research and Development of Collaborative Processes, FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern of Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.
Achim ElferingInstitute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts · CHUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn times of the COVID-19 pandemic, employees around the world may be practicing part-time telework at home. Little is known about the working conditions at home and its impact on the employee's occupational health.

objectiveThis systematic review examines the working conditions at employees' homes, the work-related disorders associated with working from home, organizations' perceptions of ergonomics at home and how they support their teleworkers.

methodsA search of electronic databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, Google Scholar, Open Grey, Pedro, PsychInfo, PubPsych, Scopus and Web of Science) was performed. Twelve studies were included in this review.

resultsThe findings highlight the lack of ergonomic working conditions for home-based teleworkers. Furthermore, the results underline organizations' lack of awareness regarding home-based policies, ergonomics programs and the health-related consequences associated with the absence of ergonomic support.

conclusionThese findings suggest that home-based teleworkers have increased health risks. This assumption is substantiated by the fact that most of the included studies reported teleworkers who have experienced musculoskeletal issues. These results underline the necessity for implementing ergonomic design recommendations, especially for working at home. Further research is needed to understand the impact of ergonomics programs and workplace design for working at home.

Indexed as

COVID-19Occupational HealthErgonomicsHumansPandemicsWorkplaceergonomicHome-based teleworkremote workwork policy

Identifiers

PMID35599524
PMCPMC9398062
OpenAlexW4280510472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.