Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40041187›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Working from home and health complaints: on the difference between telework and informal overtime at home.

Alexandra Mergener, Nico Stawarz, Heiko Rüger, Inga Laß

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Alexandra MergenerFederal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB), Bonn, Germany.
Nico StawarzFederal Institute for Population Research (BiB), Wiesbaden, Germany.
Heiko RügerFederal Institute for Population Research (BiB), Wiesbaden, Germany.
Inga LaßMelbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Health StatusMental HealthTeleworkingWorkloadAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesGermanyjob demandsjob resourcesmental healthmusculoskeletal complaintsphysical healthremote work

Identifiers

PMID40041187
PMCPMC11878154

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.