PMID: identifiant
de la référence Pubmed : |
 |
 (22264402)  |
|
| titre : |
|
Comparison of alternative versions of the job demand-control scales in 17 European cohort studies: the IPD-Work consortium. |
|
| auteur(s) : |
|
Eleonor Fransson ( ) 1, 2, Solja Nyberg3, Katriina Heikkilä3, Lars Alfredsson1, De Dirk Bacquer4, G David Batty5, 6, Sébastien Bonenfant7, Annalisa Casini8, Els Clays4, Marcel Goldberg7, France Kittel8, Markku Koskenvuo9, Anders Knutsson10, Constanze Leineweber11, Linda Magnusson Hanson11, Maria Nordin12, Archana Singh-Manoux5, 7, Sakari Suominen13, 14, Jussi Vahtera13, 15, Peter Westerholm16, Hugo Westerlund5, 11, Marie Zins7, Töres Theorell11, Mika Kivimäki3, 17 |
|
| laboratoire : |
|
|
|
| résumé : |
|
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Job strain (i.e., high job demands combined with low job control) is a frequently used indicator of harmful work stress, but studies have often used partial versions of the complete multi-item job demands and control scales. Understanding whether the different instruments assess the same underlying concepts has crucial implications for the interpretation of findings across studies, harmonisation of multi-cohort data for pooled analyses, and design of future studies. As part of the 'IPD-Work' (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium, we compared different versions of the demands and control scales available in 17 European cohort studies. METHODS: Six of the 17 studies had information on the complete scales and 11 on partial scales. Here, we analyse individual level data from 70 751 participants of the studies which had complete scales (5 demand items, 6 job control items). RESULTS: We found high Pearson correlation coefficients between complete scales of job demands and control relative to scales with at least three items (r > 0.90) and for partial scales with two items only (r = 0.76-0.88). In comparison with scores from the complete scales, the agreement between job strain definitions was very good when only one item was missing in either the demands or the control scale (kappa > 0.80); good for job strain assessed with three demand items and all six control items (kappa > 0.68) and moderate to good when items were missing from both scales (kappa = 0.54-0.76). The sensitivity was >0.80 when only one item was missing from either scale, decreasing when several items were missing in one or both job strain subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Partial job demand and job control scales with at least half of the items of the complete scales, and job strain indices based on one complete and one partial scale, seemed to assess the same underlying concepts as the complete survey instruments. |
|
| domaine : |
|
Sciences du Vivant/Santé publique et épidémiologie
|
|
langue du texte
intégral : |
|
Anglais |
|
| ISSN : |
|
1471-2458 |
|
|
| type de publication : |
|
Articles dans des revues avec comité de lecture |
|
| DOI : |
|
10.1186/1471-2458-12-62 |
|
| journal : |
|
| BMC Public Health (BMC Public Health) |
| Publisher |
BioMed Central |
| ISSN |
1471-2458 |
|
|
| Audience : |
|
internationale |
|
| date de publication : |
|
20/01/2012 |
|
date de publication
électronique : |
|
20/01/2012 |
|
| volume : |
|
12 |
|
| numéro : |
|
1 |
|
| page, identifiant, ... : |
|
62 |
|
|
| mots-clés auteur : |
|
Job demands – Job control – Job strain – Work stress – Agreement |
|
| contrat, financement : |
|
The IPD work consortium is supported by the EU New OSH ERA research programme (funded by the Finnish Work Environment Fund, Finland, the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research, Sweden (2009-2126), the German Social Accident Insurance, Germany, the Danish National Research Centre for the Working Environment), the Academy of Finland(grant #132944), the BUPA Foundation (grant #22094477) and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, the Netherlands. EIF is supported by the Swedish council for working life and social research (2009-2126, 2010-1823). STN and KH are funded by the Academy of Finland and the Finnish Work Environment Foundation. LA is funded by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (2007-0740). DdB, AC, EC, FK and the Belstress studies are supported by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office, the National Research Foundation (FWO/FNRS) and the Belgian Federal Public Service of Employment, Labour and Social Dialogue and the European Social Fund. GDB is a Wellcome Trust Fellow. CL is funded by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (2005-0734) and the Swedish Research Council (825-2009-6192). LLMH is supported by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (2008-1077). ASM is supported by a "European Young Investigator Award" from the European Science Foundation and the National Institute of Aging, NIH (R01AG013196 (PI); R01AG034454) (PI)). HW is financed by a research program grant from the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research (2007-1143). MiK is funded by the Academy of Finland, the UK BUPA Foundation, the Medical Research Council, UK, and the US National Institutes of Health (R01HL036310; R01AG034454). |
|
