Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35829741›Full record

SynthesisInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2022

The relationship between telework from home and the psychosocial work environment: a systematic review.

Jolien Vleeshouwers, Lise Fløvik, Jan Olav Christensen, Håkon A Johannessen, Live Bakke Finne, Benedicte Mohr, Ingrid Løken Jørgensen, Lars-Kristian Lunde

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Psychosocial working conditions and mental well-being of remote and stationary employees: a longitudinal study.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Jolien VleeshouwersNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Lise FløvikNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Jan Olav ChristensenNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Håkon A JohannessenNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Live Bakke FinneNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Benedicte MohrNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Ingrid Løken JørgensenNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway.
Lars-Kristian LundeNational Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 5330 Majorstuen, 0304, Oslo, Norway. Lars-Kristian.Lunde@stami.no.ORCID 0000-0001-6219-9244

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTelework from home (TWFH) has become routine for many, yet research on how this may affect the psychosocial work environment is sparse. To understand the effects that TWFH may have on the psychosocial work environment, this systematic literature review identified, evaluated, and summarized findings on the association of TWFH with factors of the psychosocial work environment.

methodsSearches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Amed, PsycINFO, and PubMed. The topic of the study reflected TWFH, and subjects should be office workers employed at a company. Outcomes should reflect psychosocial work environment factors. Inclusion criteria stated that studies should be primary, quantitative, and published in a peer-reviewed journal. English language publications dating from January 2010 to February 2021 were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and quality of overall evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

resultsSearches resulted in 3354 publications, and after screening rounds 43 peer-reviewed original studies satisfying predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were included. Fourteen individual psychosocial work environment outcome categories were studied. Limited overall evidence to support effects of TWFH on the included work environment outcomes, with evidence being rated either of low or very low quality. Flexibility and autonomy are discussed as potential mediating variables in the relationship between TWFH and the psychosocial work environment.

conclusionThere is a lack of high-quality research investigating effects of TWFH on the psychosocial work environment. To suggest TWFH guidelines or recommendations, there is a need for research with high-quality longitudinal designs, precise measures of time use and location of work, and validated measures of factors known to be of importance. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021233796.

Indexed as

TeleworkingWorkplaceBiasHumansPsychosocial work environmentRemote workTelecommutingTeleworkWorking from home

Identifiers

PMID35829741
PMCPMC9652268

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.