Although the simple prevalence rate of MRT67307 in vivo general psychological distress was highest in the iso-strain group, it was not when the family-to-work conflict and stress from outside-work problems variables were entered in the multivariate analyses. In female workers, the highest risk for general psychological distress was found in the iso-strain group as predicted by the demand-control-support model, however, its effect size (OR = 3.66) was close to that (OR = 3.49) IWP-2 solubility dmso of the group with low job control, low social support at work, and low job demands: the family-to-work conflict
and stress from outside-work problems variables narrowed the risk difference between the two groups in the multivariate analyses. The two combinations (high job demand and low social support at work; low job control and high job demands)
did not increase the risk for general psychological distress in female workers as long as job control or social support at work was high, respectively. Sensitivity tests in two alternative groups Sensitivity tests were conducted in the two alternative study groups to see whether the unhealthy workers Selleckchem Go6983 at baseline, excluded from the study subjects of this study, made a difference in the above results. The sensitivity analyses were the same as the above multivariate analyses (Tables 3, 4 and 5), except that they were conducted additionally after adjustment of the health conditions at baseline. In the two alternative study groups, the three unhealthy conditions, such as musculoskeletal
disorder, chronic diseases, and self-reported poor health, were more strongly associated with psychological distress in women than in men (data not shown here). In men, the results of the sensitivity analyses in the larger sample (i.e., alternative study group 1, n = 4,236) were generally similar to those in the above multivariate analyses. For instance, a synergistic effect of low job control and low social support at work Baf-A1 on psychological distress was observed only when job demands were low (Table 6), although its synergy index decreased to 5.88 (80% CI = 1.31–26.43). However, the combination of low job control and low social support at work was a significant risk factor for psychological distress even when job demands were high, which was different from the result only with the relatively healthy workers (i.e., Table 5). In women, the combination of low job control and low social support at work was still a significant risk factor for psychological distress, regardless of the level of job demands, but its effect sizes decreased substantially. For example, the synergy indexes were 1.16 (in the low job demands group) and 1.04 (in high job demands group) and their 80% CIs included unity (Table 6).