Prevalence of Shift Work Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Prevalence of Shift Work Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.638252
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Sagoe D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pallesen S;Bjorvatn B;Waage S;Harris A;Sagoe D
目的：迄今为止，还没有关于轮班工作障碍（SWD）患病率的系统综述或荟萃分析。因此，其目的是回顾流行研究的社会福利署，计算一个整体的患病率的随机效应荟萃分析方法和调查相关的社会福利署患病率使用随机效应荟萃回归。研究方法：使用检索词“轮班工作障碍”和“轮班工作睡眠障碍”在ISI Web of Science、PsycNET、PubMed和Google Scholar中进行系统检索。没有对时限作出任何限制。纳入的研究必须提供以英文发表的职业样本中有关社署患病率的原始数据。总共有349个独特的命中。最终纳入了29项研究，其中两位作者使用预定义的数据字段独立提取数据。元回归包括四个预测因素（诊断标准，研究国家，工人类型和样本量）。结果：SWD的总患病率为26.5%（95%可信区间= 21.0-32.8）。Cochran Q为1，845.4（df = 28，p < 0.001），I2为98.5%，表明观察到的患病率估计值具有非常高的异质性。诊断标准（国际睡眠障碍分类-2 = 0，国际睡眠障碍分类-3 = 1）和样本量与SWD患病率呈负相关。结论：在纳入的研究中，SWD的患病率很高。研究间的差异很大，部分原因是诊断标准和样本量。为方便进行有关社署的比较研究，我们有需要确定和统一评估方法，并就样本限制达成协议。
Objectives: No systematic review or meta-analysis concerning the prevalence of shift work disorder (SWD) has been conducted so far. The aim was thus to review prevalence studies of SWD, to calculate an overall prevalence by a random effects meta-analysis approach and investigate correlates of SWD prevalence using a random-effects meta-regression. Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in ISI Web of Science, PsycNET, PubMed, and Google Scholar using the search terms “shift work disorder” and “shift work sleep disorder.” No restrictions in terms of time frame were used. Included studies had to present original data on the prevalence of SWD in an occupational sample published in English. A total of 349 unique hits were made. In all, 29 studies were finally included from which two authors independently extracted data using predefined data fields. The meta-regression included four predictors (diagnostic criteria, study country, type of workers, and sample size). Results: The overall prevalence of SWD was 26.5% (95% confidence interval = 21.0–32.8). Cochran Q was 1,845.4 (df = 28, p < 0.001), and the I2 was 98.5%, indicating very high heterogeneity across the observed prevalence estimates. Diagnostic criteria (International Classification of Sleep Disorders-2 = 0, International Classification of Sleep Disorders-3 = 1) and sample size were inversely related to SWD prevalence. Conclusions: The prevalence of SWD was high across the included studies. The between-study disparity was large and was partly explained by diagnostic criteria and sample size. In order to facilitate comparative research on SWD, there is a need for validation and standardization of assessment methodology as well as agreement in terms of sample restrictions.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Flo E;Pallesen S;Magerøy N;Moen BE;Grønli J;Hilde Nordhus I;Bjorvatn B
通讯作者：
Bjorvatn B
影响因子：
5.6
作者：
Barger, Laura K.;Ogeil, Rowan P.;Rajaratnam, Shantha M. W.
通讯作者：
Rajaratnam, Shantha M. W.
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Di Milia L;Waage S;Pallesen S;Bjorvatn B
通讯作者：
Bjorvatn B
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Duval, S;Tweedie, R
通讯作者：
Tweedie, R
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Di Muzio M;Diella G;Di Simone E;Novelli L;Alfonsi V;Scarpelli S;Annarumma L;Salfi F;Pazzaglia M;Giannini AM;De Gennaro L
通讯作者：
De Gennaro L