Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37534427›Full record

ArticleLa Medicina del lavoro2023

To Work or Not to Work Remotely? Work-to-family Interface Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Chiara Ghislieri, Monica Molino, Valentina Dolce

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in La Medicina del lavoro, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Chiara GhislieriUniversity of Turin, Department of Psychology. chiara.ghislieri@unito.it.
Monica MolinoUniversity of Turin, Department of Psychology. monica.molino@unito.it.
Valentina DolceResearch Group in Social Psychology (GRePS), Institute of Psychology, University of Lyon 2. valentina.dolce@univ-lyon2.fr.
University of Turin · ITUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis paper provides a brief, evidence-based reflection on the differences between 'old-normal' remote working and mandatory work-from-home during the Covid-19 pandemic. From the perspective of applied psychology in the field of work and organizations, we used self-report instruments to assess variations in work-family conflict and enrichment, frequency of information and communication technologies use, and recovery in two longitudinal studies.

methodsThe first study involved 148 individuals from the technical-administrative staff of a large Italian University, during an experimentation of remote working (one day per week) in 2019. The second study, conducted during the first lockdown in 2020, involved 144 individuals (occasional sample, heterogeneous by profession). All participants completed a self-report online questionnaire two times six months apart.

resultsAlthough the two studies are not directly comparable, the results showed two different situations: in the condition of experimental remote working (one day per week), participants reported a decrease in work-family conflict and an improvement in recovery experiences, while in the emergency remote working condition, a deterioration in work-family enrichment was found.

conclusionsThese findings highlighted that some differences exist between a planned remote working condition and a mandatory one in an emergency. We briefly discuss these aspects to inform future organizational decisions and actions for the 'new normal'.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsSelf ReportUniversities

Identifiers

PMID37534427
PMCPMC10415843
OpenAlexW4385514250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.