Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36910835›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023

Part-time or full-time teleworking? A systematic review of the psychosocial risk factors of telework from home.

Evelise Dias Antunes, Leonardo Rodrigues Thomaz Bridi, Marta Santos, Frida Marina Fischer

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

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors.

Evelise Dias AntunesFederal Institute of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.
Leonardo Rodrigues Thomaz BridiCatarinense Federal Institute, Videira, Brazil.
Marta SantosCenter for Psychology at the University of Porto, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Frida Marina FischerDepartment of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic thousands of people have experienced teleworking and this practice is becoming increasingly commonplace. This review aims to highlight the differences in exposure to psychosocial risk factors for health between part-time and full-time teleworking from home. Methods: The protocol of the systematic review of the literature was registered on PROSPERO 2020 platform according to the PRISMA statement guidelines. The key words "telework" and "frequency" ("part-time" or "full-time"), together with their synonyms and variations, were searched. Independent researchers conducted the systematic search of 7 databases: Scopus, SciELO, PePSIC; PsycInfo, PubMed, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) and Web of Science. Of the 638 articles identified from 2010 to June 2021, 32 were selected for data extraction. The authors evaluated the risk of bias and quality of evidence of the studies included using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Main themes categorized include 7 dimensions of psychosocial risk factors: work intensity and working hours; emotional demands; autonomy; social relationships at work; conflict of values, work insecurity and home/work interface. Results: The results revealed scant practice of full-time teleworking prior to the pandemic. Regarding the psychosocial risk factors found, differences were evident before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. For part-time and full-time telework prior to the pandemic, the dimensions of intensification of work and working hours, social relationships at work, and the home-work interface were the most prominent factors. However, studies performed during the COVID-19 pandemic where teleworking was mostly performed full-time, there was an increase in focus on emotional demands and the home-work interface, and a reduction in the other dimensions. Discussion: Full-time telework brings important changes in working conditions and has the potential to affect living and health conditions of teleworkers. Part-time teleworking may have positive impact on psychosocial risk factors, favoring work-home balance, communication, and social relationships. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=191455, PROSPERO 2020 CRD4202019 1455.

Indexed as

ergonomicshome workingpsychosocial risk factorssystematic reviewteleworking

Identifiers

PMID36910835
PMCPMC9992198

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.