Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38711843›Full record

ArticleGlobal epidemiology2024

Does recall bias explain the association of mood disorders with workplace harassment?

Igor Burstyn, Jean-Michel Galarneau, Nicola Cherry

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Igor BurstynDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jean-Michel GalarneauDivision of Preventive Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Nicola CherryDivision of Preventive Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the contribution of recall bias to the observed excess in mental ill-health in those reporting harassment at work. Methods: A prospective cohort of 1885 workers in welding and electrical trades was contacted every six months for up to 5 years, asking whether they were currently anxious or depressed and whether this was made worse by work. Only at the end of the study did we ask about any workplace harassment they had experienced at work. We elicited sensitivity and specificity of self-reported bullying from published reliability studies and formulated priors that reflect the possibility of over-reporting of workplace harassment (exposure) by those whose anxiety or depression was reported to be made worse by work (cases). We applied the resulting misclassification models to probabilistic bias analysis (PBA) of relative risks. Results: We observe that PBA implies that it is unlikely that biased misclassification due to the study subjects' states of mind could have caused the entire observed association. Indeed, the results demonstrated that doubling of risk of anxiety or depression following workplace harassment is plausible, with the unadjusted relative risk attenuated with understated uncertainty. Conclusions: It seems unlikely that risk of anxiety or depression following workplace harassment can be explained by the form of recall bias that we proposed.

Indexed as

AnxietyBullyingDepressionDifferential misclassification of exposureHarassmentInformation biasOccupationalProbabilistic bias analysisQuantitative bias analysis

Identifiers

PMID38711843
PMCPMC11070321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.