Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41316074›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

The Occupational Stress Check and Assessment Questionnaire: development, validity, and reliability.

Huining Wang, Yanping Zhang, Xiyong Cui, Baolong Liu, Dongsheng Niu, Tenglong Yan, Huijie Zhang, Luyang Wang, Jue Li

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Huining Wang *Beijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Yanping Zhang *Beijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Xiyong CuiBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Baolong LiuBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Dongsheng NiuBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Tenglong YanBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Huijie ZhangBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Luyang WangBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China.
Jue LiBeijing Institute of Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment, Beijing, 100093, China. lijue88@sina.com.

Funding

Capital's Funds for Health Improvement and Research CFH 2024-2G-3104
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting occupational stress questionnaires are mostly based on Western work environments and were generally developed earlier, with insufficient cultural adaptation and incomplete coverage of emerging stressors in Chinese work environments. Their applicability has also been constrained by cultural differences and by the lack of validation in non-Western populations. This study aimed to develop and evaluate an instrument to measure the level of occupational stress among workers and the risk of occupational stress in the workplace.

methodThe study was carried out in two stages: questionnaire development and item screening with subsequent questionnaire evaluation. The Occupational Stress Check and Assessment Questionnaire (OSCAQ) was developed based on three classical models: the NIOSH Model of Job Stress, the Job Demand-Control-Support (JDCS) Model, and the Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) Model. The initial questionnaire was developed through a comprehensive literature review, reference to existing scales, expert consultation, and a preliminary survey conducted among the target population. During July 2023 to November 2024, a valid sample of 13,019 respondents was collected in Beijing, China, through an online platform. Item analysis and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were conducted on a sample of 6,453 workers to screen questionnaire items and investigate the factorial structure. Validity testing was conducted on a sample of 6,566 workers using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Cronbach's α coefficients and Spearman-Brown coefficients were used to determine the questionnaire's internal consistency reliability.

resultsThrough item analysis and EFA, a total of 10 items were removed from the OSCAQ, resulting in a final questionnaire consisting of 75 items. The retained items were categorized into three subscales: work stressors, social support factors, and stress reactions. The work stressors and social support factors were jointly analysed, explaining 66.99% of the total variance, while the stress reactions were analysed separately, accounting for 64.43% of the total variance. A good model fit was indicated by CFA, as evidenced by root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.063, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.908, tucker-lewis index (TLI) = 0.905, and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.067. Convergent validity was demonstrated, with all latent constructs exceeding the combined reliability (CR) threshold (> 0.70), and most average variance extracted (AVE) values above 0.50, except for the work stressors subscale (AVE = 0.443). Discriminant validity was supported, as the square root of AVE for each dimension was greater than its correlations with other dimensions. The questionnaire demonstrated good internal consistency, with Cronbach's α coefficients ranging from 0.911 to 0.952 across subscales and from 0.770 to 0.927 across dimensions, and Spearman-Brown coefficients ranging from 0.850 to 0.895 and 0.671 to 0.919, respectively.

conclusionThe OSCAQ was demonstrated to possess satisfactory reliability and validity, and can be considered a suitable instrument for assessing the status of occupational stress.

Indexed as

Occupational StressAdultChinaFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkplaceOccupational stressQuestionnaire developmentReliabilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID41316074
PMCPMC12772091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.