Advanced

Validity test of the IPD-Work consortium approach for creating comparable job strain groups between Job Content Questionnaire and Demand-Control Questionnaire.

Choi, Bongkyoo; Ko, Sangbaek and Östergren, Per-Olof LU (2015) In International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 28(2). p.321-333
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to test the validity of the IPD-Work Consortium approach for creating comparable job strain groups between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and the Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ). Material and Methods: A random population sample (N = 682) of all middle-aged Malmo males and females was given a questionnaire with the 14-item JCQ and 11-item DCQ for the job control and job demands. The JCQ job control and job demands scores were calculated in 3 different ways: using the 14-item JCQ standard scale formulas (method 1); dropping 3 job control items and using the 11-item JCQ standard scale formulas with additional scale weights (method 2); and the approach of the IPD Group (method 3), dropping 3 job control... (More)
Objectives: This study aims to test the validity of the IPD-Work Consortium approach for creating comparable job strain groups between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and the Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ). Material and Methods: A random population sample (N = 682) of all middle-aged Malmo males and females was given a questionnaire with the 14-item JCQ and 11-item DCQ for the job control and job demands. The JCQ job control and job demands scores were calculated in 3 different ways: using the 14-item JCQ standard scale formulas (method 1); dropping 3 job control items and using the 11-item JCQ standard scale formulas with additional scale weights (method 2); and the approach of the IPD Group (method 3), dropping 3 job control items, but using the simple 11-item summation-based scale formulas. The high job strain was defined as a combination of high demands and low control. Results: Between the 2 questionnaires, false negatives for the high job strain were much greater than false positives (37-49% vs. 7-13%). When the method 3 was applied, the sensitivity of the JCQ for the high job strain against the DCQ was lowest (0.51 vs. 0.60-0.63 when the methods 1 and 2 were applied), although the specificity was highest (0.93 vs. 0.87-0.89 when the methods 1 and 2 were applied). The prevalence of the high job strain with the JCQ (the method 3 was applied) was considerably lower (4-7%) than with the JCQ (the methods 1 and 2 were applied) and the DCQ. The number of congruent cases for the high job strain between the 2 questionnaires was smallest when the method 3 was applied. Conclusions: The IPD-Work Consortium approach showed 2 major weaknesses to be used for epidemiological studies on the high job strain and health outcomes as compared to the standard JCQ methods: the greater misclassification of the high job strain and lower prevalence of the high job strain. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Epidemiological studies, Malmo, Sensitivity, Specificity, Scoring, methods, Misclassification
in
International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health
volume
28
issue
2
pages
321 - 333
publisher
De Gruyter
external identifiers
  • wos:000353639800010
  • scopus:84952011479
  • pmid:26182927
ISSN
1896-494X
DOI
10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00355
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
7c16d956-4497-42f7-af38-89a66c06f158 (old id 7432817)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=26182927
date added to LUP
2015-07-03 07:08:52
date last changed
2017-01-01 03:20:57
@article{7c16d956-4497-42f7-af38-89a66c06f158,
  abstract     = {Objectives: This study aims to test the validity of the IPD-Work Consortium approach for creating comparable job strain groups between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and the Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ). Material and Methods: A random population sample (N = 682) of all middle-aged Malmo males and females was given a questionnaire with the 14-item JCQ and 11-item DCQ for the job control and job demands. The JCQ job control and job demands scores were calculated in 3 different ways: using the 14-item JCQ standard scale formulas (method 1); dropping 3 job control items and using the 11-item JCQ standard scale formulas with additional scale weights (method 2); and the approach of the IPD Group (method 3), dropping 3 job control items, but using the simple 11-item summation-based scale formulas. The high job strain was defined as a combination of high demands and low control. Results: Between the 2 questionnaires, false negatives for the high job strain were much greater than false positives (37-49% vs. 7-13%). When the method 3 was applied, the sensitivity of the JCQ for the high job strain against the DCQ was lowest (0.51 vs. 0.60-0.63 when the methods 1 and 2 were applied), although the specificity was highest (0.93 vs. 0.87-0.89 when the methods 1 and 2 were applied). The prevalence of the high job strain with the JCQ (the method 3 was applied) was considerably lower (4-7%) than with the JCQ (the methods 1 and 2 were applied) and the DCQ. The number of congruent cases for the high job strain between the 2 questionnaires was smallest when the method 3 was applied. Conclusions: The IPD-Work Consortium approach showed 2 major weaknesses to be used for epidemiological studies on the high job strain and health outcomes as compared to the standard JCQ methods: the greater misclassification of the high job strain and lower prevalence of the high job strain.},
  author       = {Choi, Bongkyoo and Ko, Sangbaek and Östergren, Per-Olof},
  issn         = {1896-494X},
  keyword      = {Epidemiological studies,Malmo,Sensitivity,Specificity,Scoring,methods,Misclassification},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {321--333},
  publisher    = {De Gruyter},
  series       = {International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health},
  title        = {Validity test of the IPD-Work consortium approach for creating comparable job strain groups between Job Content Questionnaire and Demand-Control Questionnaire.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00355},
  volume       = {28},
  year         = {2015},
}