Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42467702›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2026

Work-family conflict and mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dongyu Liu, Yanyan Ni, Tiffany S W Ma, Xiaoyan Fan, Yongle Zhan, Ivan H L Lam, Matthew C L Lui, Tarani Chandola, Ichiro Kawachi, Pim Cuijpers and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2026. 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

11 authors.

Dongyu LiuSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3524-5094
Yanyan NiSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8745-3453
Tiffany S W MaSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5980-6293
Xiaoyan FanSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3946-3892
Yongle ZhanDepartment of Surgery, School of Clinical Medicine, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7378-1915
Ivan H L LamLKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4002-415X
Matthew C L LuiLKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4264-9479
Tarani ChandolaDepartment of Sociology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1864-3413
Ichiro KawachiHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5497-2743
Michael Y NiSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1217-5858

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWork-family conflict, defined as a type of inter-role conflict where demands from work and family roles are incompatible, is a global public health concern. Cross-sectional studies consistently demonstrate associations between work-family conflict and adverse mental health outcomes. However, longitudinal evidence remains mixed, highlighting the need for a comprehensive synthesis of available data to better understand its long-term impacts. METHODS AND

findingsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies of associations between work-family conflict and mental health outcomes, involving 112,714 participants and 52 studies in the meta-analysis. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022325540). We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO for English-language articles and SinoMed for Chinese-language articles in February-March 2026. We further performed backward citation searches by screening the reference lists of previously published reviews to ensure the comprehensive inclusion of all eligible studies. Eligible studies were original longitudinal research focusing on adult workers, examining work-to-family and/or family-to-work conflict as exposures related to mental health outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for outcomes with three or more comparable studies, converting effect sizes to standardised regression coefficients (β), indicating standard deviation (SD) differences in mental health per 1-SD increase in work-family conflict. We synthesised effect sizes with the most comprehensive confounding adjustments when possible, including sociodemographic, work/family-related factors, and baseline mental health. Work-to-family conflict was associated with depressive symptoms (β = 0.10, 95% confidence interval [0.06, 0.15]; p < 0.001), burnout (β = 0.11, 95% CI [0.01, 0.21]; p = 0.040), and general mental distress (β = 0.13, 95% CI [0.03, 0.24]; p = 0.005), independent of baseline mental health and other confounders. Significant associations were also found for family-to-work conflict with depressive symptoms (β = 0.09, 95% CI [0.04, 0.15]; p = 0.006) and burnout (β = 0.08, 95% CI [0.03, 0.13]; p = 0.013) in studies with similar adjustments. No significant differences emerged based on gender, follow-up length, and geographical location. While evidence of publication bias was identified, sensitivity analyses employing a trim-and-fill method to adjust for this bias yielded broadly similar pooled estimates. A causal relationship cannot be fully established as all identified studies were observational.

conclusionsThese findings provide evidence of the longitudinal association between work-family conflicts and mental health outcomes, underscoring the need for context-specific policies in promoting work-family balance and mental health.

Indexed as

Mental HealthWork-Life BalanceHumansRole Conflict

Identifiers

PMID42467702
PMCPMC13379121

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.