A Cross-Sectional Study of the Mismatch Between Telecommuting Preference and Frequency Associated With Psychological Distress Among Japanese Workers in the COVID-19 Pandemic

  1. Souhei Otsuka
  2. Tomohiro Ishimaru
  3. Masako Nagata
  4. Seiichiro Tateishi
  5. Hisashi Eguchi
  6. Mayumi Tsuji
  7. Akira Ogami
  8. Shinya Matsuda
  9. Yoshihisa Fujino

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

To examine how the mismatch between telecommuting preference and telecommuting frequency was associated with psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods:

Data from 33,302 workers throughout Japan were obtained using an Internet survey. Among 33,302 participants, 20,395 who telecommuted were included in the analysis. Participants’ telecommuting preference and frequency during the COVID-19 pandemic were determined using a questionnaire. Psychological distress was assessed using Kessler 6 (K6).

Results:

Among participants who did and did not prefer to telecommute, those who telecommuted four or more days per week had an OR of psychological distress of 0.67 ( P  < 0.001) and 1.87 ( P  = 0.001), respectively, compared with those who rarely telecommuted.

Conclusions:

The association between telecommuting and psychological distress differs depending on telecommuting preference.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1097/jom.0000000000002318
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.20.21257516: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This study was approved by the ethics committee of XXXX.
    Consent: Informed consent was obtained via a form on the survey website.
    Sex as a biological variableData from the remaining 20,395 (9,964 males and 10,431 females) participants who indicated that their work was primarily desk work or primarily involved interpersonal communication were used for analysis.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All analyses were performed in Stata (Stata Statistical Software: Release 16; StataCorp LLC, TX, USA).
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study has several limitations. First, since this study is a survey of Internet monitors, selection bias was unavoidable. However, to reduce bias as much as possible, we selected subjects according to region, occupation, and prefecture based on infection rates. Second, we did not obtain any detailed information about participants’ industry or job description. Telecommuting frequency and preference may be related to whether the work is performed at a site that makes telecommuting impossible, such as a factory, or at an office with sufficient Internet connection. Third, telecommuting preference may be related to workers’ health. Workers who are in poor health, including those with mental illness, may be more likely to choose to work from home. In conclusion, this study showed that the association between psychological distress and telecommuting frequency differed depending on telecommuting preference during the COVID-19 pandemic. Workers who preferred to telecommute experienced less psychological distress with increasing telecommuting frequency, while those who preferred not to telecommute experienced more psychological distress with increasing telecommuting frequency. It is thus important to consider workers’ telecommuting preference when deciding their telecommuting frequency to limit psychological distress.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.05.20.21257516v1 on medRxiv