Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37701491›Full record

ArticleAnnals of occupational and environmental medicine2023

Association between lone work and self-rated health status: using the 5th Korean Working Conditions Survey.

Eunseun Han, Ui-Jin Kim, Yongho Lee, Sanghyuk Lee, Seunghon Ham, Wanhyung Lee, Won-Jun Choi, Seong-Kyu Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of occupational and environmental medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Eunseun HanDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8494-1195
Ui-Jin KimDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2021-9566
Yongho LeeDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8454-976X
Sanghyuk LeeDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2925-0623
Seunghon HamDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5167-9661
Wanhyung LeeDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6408-7668
Won-Jun ChoiDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8096-7542
Seong-Kyu KangDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3205-2708

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Lone workers are generally defined as individuals who work alone without supervision, including self-employed people. While lone workers are considered a vulnerable group in some countries, there is a lack of research on their health status in domestic studies. Globally, the number of lone workers has been increasing, and this trend has been further accelerated since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the rise of remote work. Methods: The study analyzed data from 44,281 participants, excluding unpaid family workers, soldiers, and those with missing data. Lone workers were defined as individuals who reported having no colleagues with the same job at their current workplace. Self-rated health status was categorized as "good" or "poor." Results: This study found a statistically significant higher number of lone workers among women compare to men. The largest occupational category for lone workers was service and sales workers, followed by agriculture and fisheries workers. A majority of non-lone workers reported working 40 hours or less per week, while the majority of lone workers reported working 53 hours or more per week. In addition, lone workers had significantly poorer health status evaluations compared to non-lone workers (odds ratio: 1.297; 95% confidence interval: 1.165-1.444). Conclusions: Further research is needed to investigate the causal relationship between lone work and health, using data collected after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19Isolated workKWCSLone workSelf-rated health status

Identifiers

PMID37701491
PMCPMC10493374

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.