Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41509723›Full record

ArticleRevista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT

Investigation of cases of work-related mental disorders in Brazil: an ecological study.

Benjamim Antônio Pinheiro Vieira, Leticia Barros Ricarte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT. 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

2 authors.

Benjamim Antônio Pinheiro VieiraFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Estadual do Ceará (UECE), Fortaleza, CE, Brasil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2450-019X
Leticia Barros RicarteFaculdade de Psicologia, Universidade Estadual do Ceará (UECE), Fortaleza, CE, Brasil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5281-0589

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The mental health of Brazilian workers is compromised, and work-related mental disorders are becoming increasingly common. Several factors may be associated with the rise in these cases, among which precarious work stands out as particularly relevant. Objectives: To describe the epidemiological profile of work-related mental disorders in Brazil between 2015 and 2024. Methods: This is an ecological study, with a retrospective, descriptive and quantitative approach, which analyzed from the publicly available secondary data. Results: A total of 21,186 notifications were analyzed. Women accounted for 67% of the cases of work-related mental disorders, showing an upward annual trend. Furthermore, 60% of cases occurred among individuals with completed high school or higher education. In addition, 49% of the diagnoses corresponded to neurotic disorders, stress-related disorders, and somatoform disorders, whereas mood disorder and burnout syndrome accounted for approximately 27% of reported cases. The data also show that 56% of cases of work-related mental disorders progressed to temporary disability. Nonetheless, the study faced limitations due to the high proportion of missing or blank data in the reporting system. Conclusions: Based on the information presented in this study, it becomes feasible to develop effective preventive strategies to protect workers' health and safety, as well as to reduce government expenditures.

Indexed as

epidemiology.mental healthpreventive medicinework

Identifiers

PMID41509723
PMCPMC12777721

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.