Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38494988›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2024

Associations between psychosocial work environment factors and first-time and recurrent treatment for depression: a prospective cohort study of 24,226 employees.

J Mathisen, T-L Nguyen, I E H Madsen, T Xu, J H Jensen, J K Sørensen, R Rugulies, N H Rod

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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

8 authors.

J MathisenSection of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7391-7296
T-L NguyenSection of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
I E H MadsenCopenhagen Stress Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
T XuStress Research Institute, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
J H JensenCopenhagen Stress Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1884-3703
J K SørensenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.
R RuguliesSection of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
N H RodSection of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAdverse factors in the psychosocial work environment are associated with the onset of depression among those without a personal history of depression. However, the evidence is sparse regarding whether adverse work factors can also play a role in depression recurrence. This study aimed to prospectively examine whether factors in the psychosocial work environment are associated with first-time and recurrent treatment for depression.

methodsThe study included 24,226 participants from the Danish Well-being in Hospital Employees study. We measured ten individual psychosocial work factors and three theoretical constructs (effort-reward imbalance, job strain and workplace social capital). We ascertained treatment for depression through registrations of hospital contacts for depression (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems version 10 [ICD-10]: F32 and F33) and redeemed prescriptions of antidepressant medication (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical [ATC]: N06A) in Danish national registries. We estimated the associations between work factors and treatment for depression for up to 2 years after baseline among those without (first-time treatment) and with (recurrent treatment) a personal history of treatment for depression before baseline. We excluded participants registered with treatment within 6 months before baseline. In supplementary analyses, we extended this washout period to up to 2 years. We applied logistic regression analyses with adjustment for confounding.

resultsAmong 21,156 (87%) participants without a history of treatment for depression, 350 (1.7%) had first-time treatment during follow-up. Among the 3070 (13%) participants with treatment history, 353 (11%) had recurrent treatment during follow-up. Those with a history of depression generally reported a more adverse work environment than those without such a history. Baseline exposure to bullying (odds ratio [OR] = 1.72, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.30-2.32), and to some extent also low influence on work schedule (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 0.97-1.66) and job strain (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.97-1.57), was associated with first-time treatment for depression during follow-up. Baseline exposure to bullying (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.04-1.88), lack of collaboration (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.03-1.67) and low job control (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.00-1.62) were associated with recurrent treatment for depression during follow-up. However, most work factors were not associated with treatment for depression. Using a 2-year washout period resulted in similar or stronger associations.

conclusionsDepression constitutes a substantial morbidity burden in the working-age population. Specific adverse working conditions were associated with first-time and recurrent treatment for depression and improving these may contribute to reducing the onset and recurrence of depression.

Indexed as

DepressionWorkplaceAntidepressive AgentsHumansProspective StudiesWorking ConditionsAntidepressive Agentsdepressionepidemiologyoccupational psychiatryprospective study

Identifiers

PMID38494988
PMCPMC10951797

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.