BACKGROUND: Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) is an established conceptualisation of work stress. Although a validated effort-reward questionnaire is available for public use, many epidemiological studies adopt shortened scales and proxy measures. To examine the agreement between different abbreviated measures and the original instrument, we compared different versions of the effort-reward scales available in 15 European cohort studies participating in the IPD-Work (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium. METHODS: Five of the 15 studies provide information on the original ('complete') scales measuring 'effort' and 'reward', whereas the 10 remaining studies used 'partial' scales. To compare different versions of the ERI scales, we analyse individual-level data from 31,790 participants from the five studies with complete scales. RESULTS: Pearson's correlation between partial and complete scales was very high in case of 'effort' (where 2 out of 3 items were used) and very high or high in case of 'reward', if at least 4 items (out of 7) were included. Reward scales composed of 3 items revealed good to satisfactory agreement, and in one case, a reward scale consisting of 2 items only demonstrated a modest, but still acceptable degree of agreement. Sensitivity and specificity of a composite measure, the ratio of effort and reward, comparing partial versus complete scales ranged between 59-93 and 85-99 %, respectively. Complete and partial scales were strongly associated with poor self-rated health. CONCLUSION: Our results support the notion that short proxy measures or partial versions of the original scales can be used to assess effort-reward imbalance.
BACKGROUND: Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) is an established conceptualisation of work stress. Although a validated effort-reward questionnaire is available for public use, many epidemiological studies adopt shortened scales and proxy measures. To examine the agreement between different abbreviated measures and the original instrument, we compared different versions of the effort-reward scales available in 15 European cohort studies participating in the IPD-Work (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium. METHODS: Five of the 15 studies provide information on the original ('complete') scales measuring 'effort' and 'reward', whereas the 10 remaining studies used 'partial' scales. To compare different versions of the ERI scales, we analyse individual-level data from 31,790 participants from the five studies with complete scales. RESULTS: Pearson's correlation between partial and complete scales was very high in case of 'effort' (where 2 out of 3 items were used) and very high or high in case of 'reward', if at least 4 items (out of 7) were included. Reward scales composed of 3 items revealed good to satisfactory agreement, and in one case, a reward scale consisting of 2 items only demonstrated a modest, but still acceptable degree of agreement. Sensitivity and specificity of a composite measure, the ratio of effort and reward, comparing partial versus complete scales ranged between 59-93 and 85-99 %, respectively. Complete and partial scales were strongly associated with poor self-rated health. CONCLUSION: Our results support the notion that short proxy measures or partial versions of the original scales can be used to assess effort-reward imbalance.
Authors: Jian Li; Adrian Loerbroks; Marc N Jarczok; Ina Schöllgen; Jos A Bosch; Daniel Mauss; Johannes Siegrist; Joachim E Fischer Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Akizumi Tsutsumi; Noboru Iwata; Naotaka Watanabe; Jan de Jonge; Hynek Pikhart; Juan Antonio Fernández-López; Liying Xu; Richard Peter; Anders Knutsson; Isabelle Niedhammer; Norito Kawakami; Johannes Siegrist Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2009 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Jenny Head; Mika Kivimäki; Johannes Siegrist; Jane E Ferrie; Jussi Vahtera; Martin J Shipley; Michael G Marmot Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Johannes Siegrist; Dagmar Starke; Tarani Chandola; Isabelle Godin; Michael Marmot; Isabelle Niedhammer; Richard Peter Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: S T Nyberg; K Heikkilä; E I Fransson; L Alfredsson; D De Bacquer; J B Bjorner; S Bonenfant; M Borritz; H Burr; A Casini; E Clays; N Dragano; R Erbel; G A Geuskens; M Goldberg; W E Hooftman; I L Houtman; K-H Jöckel; F Kittel; A Knutsson; M Koskenvuo; C Leineweber; T Lunau; I E H Madsen; L L Magnusson Hanson; M G Marmot; M L Nielsen; M Nordin; T Oksanen; J Pentti; R Rugulies; J Siegrist; S Suominen; J Vahtera; M Virtanen; P Westerholm; H Westerlund; M Zins; J E Ferrie; T Theorell; A Steptoe; M Hamer; A Singh-Manoux; G D Batty; M Kivimäki Journal: J Intern Med Date: 2011-12-05 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: G Salavecz; T Chandola; H Pikhart; N Dragano; J Siegrist; K-H Jöckel; R Erbel; A Pajak; S Malyutina; R Kubinova; M Marmot; M Bobak; M Kopp Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Jean-Baptist du Prel; Roma Runeson-Broberg; Peter Westerholm; Lars Alfredsson; Göran Fahlén; Anders Knutsson; Maria Nordin; Richard Peter Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2017-08-11 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Katja Spanier; Elke Peters; Elliot Michel; Friedrich Michael Radoschewski; Matthias Bethge Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2017-06-28 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Mads Nordentoft; Naja H Rod; Jens Peter Bonde; Jakob B Bjorner; Bryan Cleal; Ida E H Madsen; Linda L Magnusson Hanson; Mette A Nexo; Tom Sterud; Reiner Rugulies Journal: Sleep Med X Date: 2020-08-08
Authors: T Hintsa; A Kouvonen; M McCann; M Jokela; M Elovainio; P Demakakos Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Nico Dragano; Johannes Siegrist; Solja T Nyberg; Thorsten Lunau; Eleonor I Fransson; Lars Alfredsson; Jakob B Bjorner; Marianne Borritz; Hermann Burr; Raimund Erbel; Göran Fahlén; Marcel Goldberg; Mark Hamer; Katriina Heikkilä; Karl-Heinz Jöckel; Anders Knutsson; Ida E H Madsen; Martin L Nielsen; Maria Nordin; Tuula Oksanen; Jan H Pejtersen; Jaana Pentti; Reiner Rugulies; Paula Salo; Jürgen Schupp; Archana Singh-Manoux; Andrew Steptoe; Töres Theorell; Jussi Vahtera; Peter J M Westerholm; Hugo Westerlund; Marianna Virtanen; Marie Zins; G David Batty; Mika Kivimäki Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 4.822