CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 52Workplace Health and Well-beingOccupational Health and BurnoutEmployment and Welfare Studies

Perceived job stress and mental health in precision machine workers of Japan: a 2 year cohort study

Open access
Mino, Y, Shigemi, J, Tsuda, T, Yasuda, N, Bebbington, P·1999·Occupational and Environmental Medicine
DOI 10.1136/oem.56.1.41PMC PMC1757649
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether perceived job stress affects mental health in occupational settings. METHODS: A 2 year cohort study was conducted. Initially, a survey including the general health questionnaire (GHQ) and a questionnaire about perceived job stress was carried out. Of 462 workers who initially showed a GHQ score of < or = 7,310 were successfully followed up for 2 years. The 2 year risks of developing mental ill health (a GHQ score > or = 8) were assessed relative to perceived job stress. To control for potential confounding factors, multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The overall 2 year risk for developing mental ill health was high at 57.7%. Workers who reported aspects of perceived job stress showed a greater 2 year risk than those without stress. Multiple logistic regression analyses showed that some components of perceived job stress were associated with a higher 2 year risk, among which "not allowed to make mistakes" showed the largest adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (95% CI) of 2.37 (1.32 to 4.29). "Poor relationship with superior" had a significant effect on mental health only in women, with an adjusted OR (95% CI) of 3.79 (1.65 to 8.73). CONCLUSIONS: Certain specific items of perceived job stress seem to be associated with mental ill health in workers. These could broadly be described as job strain, or job demand items. The type of job stress that predicts mental health may be dependent on the characteristics of the workplace investigated.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/oem.56.1.41

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • No statistically significant difference between subgroups of men and women was found for job demands.

    “No statistically significant difference between subgroups of men and women was found.1 2 15 16 25”

    From Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Methods of Analysis report that, among the job-stress items, only poor relationships with superiors showed a clear difference between men's and women's risk ratios. This supports a lack of a detected sex difference in the association between work-demand stressors and mental ill health, but the paper does not report a statistical comparison of job-demand levels between men and women. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Moderate-quality evidence that high job demands increase the incidence of stress-related disorders, with a pooled OR of 1.55 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.71).

    “Eight cohort studies1 2 15 16 20 21 24 25 demonstrate that there is moderate-quality evidence that high job demands increase the incidence of SRD, with a pooled OR of 1.55 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.71) (see table 3 and figure 4).”

    From Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Abstract reports a two-year cohort study in which some perceived job-stress items, broadly described as job demands, were associated with greater risk of psychological ill health. The paper does not report a pooled OR of 1.55 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.71) or grade the evidence as moderate quality; those are claims about the eight-study synthesis, not results of this cohort study. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Moderate-quality evidence that low supervisor support increases the incidence of stress-related disorders, with a pooled OR of 1.27 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.40).

    “In total, five cohort studies demonstrate that there is moderate-quality evidence that low coworkers support1 2 16 21 with a pooled OR 1.29 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.43) and low supervisor support1 2 15 16 21 with a pooled OR 1.27 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.40) increase the incidence of SRD.”

    From Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis and Table 4 report that poor relationships with superiors predicted psychological ill health in women, but not in men. This supports the cited study’s contribution to the direction of the five-study finding, but the paper does not report the pooled OR of 1.27 or assess the quality of evidence across studies. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • All studies defined stress-related disorders based on self-report with validated and standardised questionnaires.

    “All studies defined SRD based on self-report with validated and standardised questionnaires, that is, (shortened) GHQ,1 15 16 19 20 22 Kessler 6,3 25 Maslach Burnout Inventory,2 21 Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire-Copenhagen Burnout Inventory,24 27 Setterlind Stress Inventory Profile,17 fatigue inventory,18 Brief Job Stress Questionnaire27 and burnout screening scale.26”

    From Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [15]

  • No statistically significant difference between subgroups of men and women was found for coworker and supervisor support.

    “No statistically significant difference between subgroups of men and women was found.1 2 15 16”

    From Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Methods of Analysis and Two Year Risks in Relation to Perceived Job Stress and Sex sections compare how poor relationships with superiors relate to mental ill health in men and women; they do not compare levels of supervisor support between the sexes. A search for coworker and supervisor support found no such comparison in our copy. The reported sex difference in the health association does not establish whether support itself differed. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [5]5. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition. DSM-IV. Washing- ton, DC: APA, 1994.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mino, Y., Shigemi, J., Tsuda, T., Yasuda, N., & Bebbington, P.
Affiliations
Okayama University (JP)
ORCID
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1999-01
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
41-45
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
DOI
10.1136/oem.56.1.41
PMC
PMC1757649
OpenAlex
W2069357996
Cited by
52
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
7.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
Keywords
perceived job stress, mental illness, job strain, job demands, gender differences, workplace mental health
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Japan, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Personnel Management, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Stress, Psychological, Cohort Studies, Logistic Models, Age Distribution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review