ArticleBMC public health2024
Long working hours and health in Denmark: a post hoc analysis of three cohort studies.
Article in BMC public health, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo protect the safety and health of workers, national legislations often stipulate an upper limit to weekly working time. The purpose of the present study was to provide information that may facilitate the obtainment of evidence-based limits to weekly working time.
objectiveTo estimate incidence rate ratios (RRs) of (i) hospital treatment or death due to accidental injuries, (ii) redeemed prescriptions for psychotropic drugs and (iii) redeemed prescriptions for antihypertensive drugs, respectively, as continuous functions of weekly working hours among employees in the general population of Denmark.
methodsBaseline data on working time arrangements were obtained from the Danish Labor Force Surveys of 1999-2013. Follow-ups with a mean duration of 1.8, 4.0 and 6.6 years for accidental injuries, psychotropic drugs and antihypertensive drugs, respectively, were accomplished through national registers. Adjusted RRs were obtained through Poisson regression in the interval 32-80 weekly working hours (wwh). The reference (standard working hours) was set at 37 wwh. RR estimates were interpreted in accordance with a modified version of Monson's guide to strength of associations, in which a RR in the open interval 0.83 to 1.2 is classified as 'no association' (too weak to be detected by observational studies).
resultsThe estimated RRs as well as the upper and lower limits of their 95% confidence intervals lied within the no-association zone throughout the intervals 32-76, 32-64 and 32-69 wwh, for accidental injury, psychotropic drug use and antihypertensive drug use, respectively. The estimated RRs for psychotropic drug use decreased from 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03-1.13) at 32 wwh to 0.96 (0.93-0.99) at 45 wwh. They thereafter increased to 1.00 (0.95-1.06) at 55 wwh and 1.31 (1.08-1.63) at 80 wwh. The estimated RRs for accidental injury and antihypertensive drug use increased slowly from 1.00 at 37 wwh to 1.04 (0.88-1.24) and 1.11 (0.94-1.31), respectively, at 80 wwh.
conclusionThese results suggest that, from a societal perspective, the effect of wwh on the rates of these types of morbidity is negligible throughout the interval 32-64 wwh.
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.