ArticleBMC public health2025
Development of a formative index for precarious employment in Denmark.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precarious employment and its associations with perceived stress and self-rated health: a Danish cross-sectional study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2026Article
- Assessing the performance of a novel Finnish register-based measure of precarious employment: affected employee groups and subjective and objective employment outcomes.BMC public health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundResearch on precarious employment (PE) has increased in recent decades, highlighting its association with health-related problems. However, standardized multidimensional measures of PE remain limited. This study aimed to develop and validate a multidimensional index of PE tailored to the Danish labour market, incorporating aspects of daily working conditions.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using a random sample of Danish workers aged 18-45 years, (N = 3,501). The PE Index includes six dimensions, comprising a total of 15 items: instability (2 items), salary (1 item), power and rights (4 items), work task planning (4 items), work time planning (2 items), and workers' collective (2 items), with a score ranging from 0 (no PE) to 100 (most PE). Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to explore factor structure of the PE Index. To assess reliability and inter-item correlation of the individual dimensions, Cronbach's Alpha and Kendall's Tau were applied. To examine predictive validity of the individual dimensions and the PE Index, we conducted adjusted linear regression models between the PE Index (and its individual dimensions) and 1) job insecurity, 2) worker vulnerability - measuring worker-employer relations and 3) WHO-5 Wellbeing Index (mental well-being), respectively. Model fit was assessed using R
resultsReliability was strong (α ≥ 0.85) for power and rights and work task planning, while inter-item correlations were moderate for instability (0.29) and workers' collective (0.23), and weak for work time planning (0.11). The PE Index score was statistically significantly associated with job insecurity (β = 0.03, R
conclusionsThis study developed and validated a PE Index for Danish workers, capturing daily working conditions. Findings indicate that the PE Index is associated with job insecurity, worker vulnerability, and mental well-being. The 15-item index may serve as a practical tool for future labour market research.
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.