Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35910960›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Work-Life Enrichment and Interference Among Swedish Workers: Trends From 2016 Until the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Emma Brulin, Constanze Leineweber, Paraskevi Peristera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Emma BrulinDepartment of Psychology, Stress Research Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Constanze LeineweberDepartment of Psychology, Stress Research Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Paraskevi PeristeraDepartment of Psychology, Stress Research Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered workers' possibilities to combine work and private life. Work and private life could either interfere with each other, that is, when conflicting demands arise, or enrich, that is, when the two roles are beneficial to one another. Analyzing data from the Swedish Longitudinal Occupational Survey of Health through individual growth models, we investigated time trends of interference and enrichment between work and private life from 2016 through March to September 2020, which is during the first wave of the pandemic. The sample included workers who had remained in the same workplace throughout the study period and worked at least 30% of full time, reaching 5,465 individuals. In addition, we examined trends in level of interference and enrichment across gender and industries. Results showed that Life-to-work interference increased over time in the Swedish working population, but neither did work-to-life interference nor enrichment. We observed only marginal differences across gender. Also, in the industries of fine manufacturing and real-estate activities, a decrease in interference, work-to-life interference, and life-to-work interference, respectively, was observed. In the human health and social care industry, an increase in interference and life-to-work interference was seen. Our conclusion is that overall changes to the possibilities to balance work and private life have occurred for workers in Sweden during the first period of the pandemic. Further studies are needed to study development time trends throughout the pandemic and across different occupations.

Indexed as

enrichmentinterferencelongitudinal datapandemictrends

Identifiers

PMID35910960
PMCPMC9328076

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.