4.3 Review

Work-related stress and Type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE-OXFORD
Volume 62, Issue 3, Pages 167-173

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqs002

Keywords

Work-related stress; Type 2 diabetes; systematic review; meta-analysis

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MC_U106179474] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. MRC [MC_U106179474] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Work-related psychosocial stress has been hypothesized to increase the individual risk of Type 2 diabetes; however, observational epidemiological studies investigating the association between work-related psychosocial stress and Type 2 diabetes have provided an inconsistent picture. To evaluate whether work-related psychosocial stress (defined by a work-related stress model or by long work hours) is associated with the risk of Type 2 diabetes. A systematic review of the literature was conducted until March 2010. Studies eligible for inclusion were published observational epidemiological studies of adult participants in community or occupational settings if they had a measure of work-related stress on a validated scale or a measure of work hours or overtime assessed prior to, or at the same time as, assessment of Type 2 diabetes status. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted to obtain summary odds ratios of the association. We located nine studies (four prospective, one case-control and four cross-sectional). The meta-analyses did not show any statistically significant associations between any individual aspect of work-related psychosocial stress or job strain and risk of Type 2 diabetes. The specific hypothesis that a working environment characterized by high psychosocial stress is directly associated with increased risk of Type 2 diabetes could not be supported from the meta-analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available