Cited by 539Employment and Welfare StudiesWorkplace Health and Well-beingHealth disparities and outcomes

Health effects of employment: a systematic review of prospective studies

van der Noordt, Maaike, IJzelenberg, Helma, Droomers, Mariël, Proper, Karin I·2014·Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to systematically summarise the literature on the health effects of employment. METHODS: A search for prospective studies investigating the effect of employment on health was executed in several electronic databases, and references of selected publications were checked. Subsequently, the methodological quality of each study was assessed by predefined criteria. To draw conclusions about the health effect of employment, a best evidence synthesis was used, and if possible, data were pooled. RESULTS: 33 prospective studies were included, of which 23 were of high quality. Strong evidence was found for a protective effect of employment on depression and general mental health. Pooled effect sizes showed favourable effects on depression (OR=0.52; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.83) and psychological distress (OR=0.79; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.86). Insufficient evidence was found for general health, physical health and mortality due to lack of studies or inconsistent findings. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review indicates that employment is beneficial for health, particularly for depression and general mental health. There is a need for more research on the effects of employment on specific physical health effects and mortality to fill the knowledge gaps.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/oemed-2013-101891

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Noordt, M., IJzelenberg, H., Droomers, M., & Proper, K. I.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (NL)
Corresponding author
Proper, Karin I
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-02-20
Volume
71
Issue
10
Pages
730-736
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
OpenAlex
W1980444631
Cited by
539
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Rivm Repository (Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
employment, health effects of work, depression, mental health, psychological distress, physical health, mortality
MeSH terms
Employment, Health Status, Humans, Mental Health, Prospective Studies, Stress, Psychological

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