Fiona Aanesen, Rigmor C Berg, Ingrid Løken Jørgensen, Benedicte Mohr, Karin Proper, Lars-Kristian Lunde
{"title":"Employment and mental health in the working age population: a protocol for a systematic review of longitudinal studies.","authors":"Fiona Aanesen, Rigmor C Berg, Ingrid Løken Jørgensen, Benedicte Mohr, Karin Proper, Lars-Kristian Lunde","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02613-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Employment provides economic security, a social network, and is important for self-identity. A review published by van der Noordt and colleagues in 2014 showed that employment was beneficial for depression and general mental health. However, an updated synthesis including research published in the last decade is lacking. In the planned review, we aim to update, critically assess, and synthesise the current evidence of the association between paid employment (excluding precarious employment) and common mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, and psychological distress) among the working age population in the labour force.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will follow recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting systematic reviews. Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science) will be searched from 2012, using appropriate MeSH terms and text words related to our inclusion criteria. We will screen the records against predefined eligibility criteria, first by title and abstract using the priority screening function in EPPI-Reviewer, before proceeding to full-text screening. Only studies investigating the longitudinal relationship between employment and common mental health outcomes will be included. We will search for grey literature in OpenAlex and conduct backward and forward citation searches of included studies. The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2), Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I), or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). We will conduct a narrative review and, if possible following pre-set criteria, conduct random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effect of employment on depression, anxiety, and psychological distress, across the included studies.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>An updated review of the association between non-precarious employment and mental health outcomes is needed. In the planned review, we will assess the quality of the included studies and synthesise the results across studies to make them easily accessible to policy makers and researchers. The results from the review can be used to aid in policy decisions and guide future research priorities.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023405919.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"197"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11274751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02613-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Employment provides economic security, a social network, and is important for self-identity. A review published by van der Noordt and colleagues in 2014 showed that employment was beneficial for depression and general mental health. However, an updated synthesis including research published in the last decade is lacking. In the planned review, we aim to update, critically assess, and synthesise the current evidence of the association between paid employment (excluding precarious employment) and common mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, and psychological distress) among the working age population in the labour force.
Methods: We will follow recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting systematic reviews. Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science) will be searched from 2012, using appropriate MeSH terms and text words related to our inclusion criteria. We will screen the records against predefined eligibility criteria, first by title and abstract using the priority screening function in EPPI-Reviewer, before proceeding to full-text screening. Only studies investigating the longitudinal relationship between employment and common mental health outcomes will be included. We will search for grey literature in OpenAlex and conduct backward and forward citation searches of included studies. The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2), Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I), or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). We will conduct a narrative review and, if possible following pre-set criteria, conduct random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effect of employment on depression, anxiety, and psychological distress, across the included studies.
Discussion: An updated review of the association between non-precarious employment and mental health outcomes is needed. In the planned review, we will assess the quality of the included studies and synthesise the results across studies to make them easily accessible to policy makers and researchers. The results from the review can be used to aid in policy decisions and guide future research priorities.
期刊介绍:
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.