ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Working from home and health complaints: on the difference between telework and informal overtime at home.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Working from Home: Hybrid and Predominantly Home-Based Work in Relation to Work Environment, Job Satisfaction, and Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Maintaining wellbeing in remote work: a digital ethnography into resources, boundaries, and time.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Burnout and inter-role conflict in telework: a gendered resource erosion pathway via job crafting.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the increase in the prevalence of working from home (WFH), understanding its impact on health has become more relevant. However, the possibility that health effects may depend on the specific WFH arrangement has largely been ignored in research. Objective: The aim of this study is to offer a differentiated view of WFH by distinguishing between informal overtime at home and telework during recognized working time when assessing its associations with mental and physical health complaints. Moreover, the extent of telework is considered. The study also differentiates the group of WFH non-users by distinguishing between voluntary non-use and employer-directed non-use. Methods: We apply OLS regression models with clustered standard errors by occupation to probability-based survey data that is representative of employees in Germany. The analytical sample was restricted to employees whose job tasks could be performed at home ( Results: Compared to employer-directed non-users, working informal overtime at home is associated with more mental health complaints, while telework is associated with fewer mental and physical health complaints. However, the beneficial association between recognized telework and mental health only applies to employees with relatively small extents of telework. At higher extents of telework, the mental health advantages disappear, while those for physical health tend to remain. Conclusion: This study suggests that a nuanced look at patterns of use and non-use of WFH is essential when gauging its impact on health.
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.