ArticlePloS one2024
Dimensional structure of the items from The Swedish Demand-Control-Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) used in The HUNT Study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Swedish Demand-Control-Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) is used to measure psychosocial work environment. Nine of the original 17 DCSQ items were used in the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT) in 2017-2019 (HUNT4); three items from each of the three dimensions of demand, control, and support. The goal of this paper was to assess the internal reliability and dimensional structure of the nine DCSQ items used in HUNT4.
methodHUNT4 participants registered with an occupation, and who had responded to all DCSQ items were included in the sample. Internal reliability and consistency of the nine DCSQ items were tested using composite reliability and item total correlation. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to determine whether the nine DCSQ items used in HUNT4 had a similar factor structure as the original 17 items. CFA was performed on the sample as a whole, before testing the models on different occupational groups to check if the dimensional structure remained the same.
resultsOf 56,041 HUNT4 participants (participation rate: 54%), 21,187 had a known occupation and responded to all nine DCSQ items. The mean age of the sample was 50.6 years (SD = 10.2), and the sample consisted of 57.3% females and 42.7% males. The best model fit was achieved by removing the item "Work creativity" (λ = 0.398, item total correlation 0.334) from the model. The same three-factorial structure as in the original DCSQ was seen with the remaining eight DCSQ items, with good internal consistency of all three dimensions (composite reliability ranged from 0.709 to 0.851). This dimensional structure remained the same when tested on all occupational groups.
conclusionThe results indicate that the shortened version of the Swedish DCSQ used in HUNT4 can be used to assess aspects of demand, control, and social support at work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.