ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2026
Validation of JEM Soignances Job-Exposure Matrix Through Comparison with Self-Reported Exposures Among Healthcare Workers in CONSTANCES.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA healthcare-specific job-exposure matrix, JEM Soignances, was recently developed to assess the occupational exposome of healthcare workers. This study aimed to compare estimates of known associations between occupational exposures and health outcomes obtained using JEM Soignances and self-reported data.
methodsHealthcare professionals from the CONSTANCES cohort with linked data from the French National Healthcare Database (SNDS) were included (n = 12219). Exposures were estimated using JEM Soignances (occupations and sectors of activity) and its alternative version (+ establishment size and status), as binary exposure at inclusion or as lifetime cumulative exposure (< 10y/ ≥ 10y). Association with relevant health outcomes (i.e., pain, depressive symptoms, hypertension, cancer, use of psychoactive drugs) were evaluated using logistic regression and compared to estimates obtained from self-reported exposure data in terms of direction, magnitude, and significance.
resultsFor organizational exposures, 10/16 associations for JEM Soignances and 12/16 for the alternative version aligned with self-reported data in direction and magnitude. For biomechanical exposures, confidence intervals overlapped in 11/15 associations for JEM Soignances and in 9/15 for the alternative version. For the others, discrepancies generally lean toward underestimation. For psychosocial exposure, JEM Soignances revealed significant limitations: While self-reported effort-reward imbalance was strongly associated with depressive symptoms (aOR = 3.18[2.81;3.59]), JEM Soignances underestimated this association (aOR = 1.37[1.23;1.54]), and the alternative version failed to detect it (aOR = 0.99[0.87;1.13]).
conclusionJEM Soignances demonstrated good agreement with self-reported data for organizational and biomechanical exposures but failed for psychosocial exposure, often underestimating or missing associations. Further research is needed to evaluate JEM Soignances validity for biological, chemical, and physical exposures.
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.