ArticleBMC public health2026
Candidate prognostic factors of presenteeism among French workers: an exploratory longitudinal study.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPresenteeism, defined as working despite health problems, represents a major economic and public health burden. While many determinants have been proposed, robust prognostic evidence remains limited. According to the PROGRESS framework, exploratory studies are essential to identify candidate factors before confirmation. This study aimed to explore potential prognostic factors of presenteeism among a sample of French workers.
methodsA 12-month prospective longitudinal study was conducted in three companies. Adult employees completed baseline sociodemographic characteristics, physical activity, sedentary time, psychosocial work factors, mental health, and musculoskeletal symptom questionnaires. Presenteeism was measured at a follow-up (FU) using the Stanford Presenteeism Scale-6 (SPS-6). High presenteeism was defined as a score of 16 or higher. Logistic regression analyses, adjusted for age, sex, and compliance with physical activity guidelines, were used to identify possible associated factors. Restricted cubic spline analyses were tested for potential nonlinear relationships.
resultsAmong the 224 included participants at the baseline, 139 (62.1%) completed the follow-up. The mean age was 42.9 years (± 10.8) and 60.7% were women. Twenty-nine participants (20.9%) presented high presenteeism at a follow-up. Possible associated factors included health care work sector (OR = 13.96, CI 95% 1.73-112.99), blue-collar occupation (OR = 3.91, CI 95% 1.39-11.01), extended workday (10 h or more) (OR = 0.17, CI 95% 0.05-0.60), low sedentary time (OR = 3.93, CI 95% (1.41-10.96), low decision latitude (OR = 5.71, CI 95% 2.23-14.58), job strain (OR = 5.00, CI 95% 1.25-20.08), depression (OR = 3.56, CI 95% 1.30-9.60), poor sleep quality (OR = 1.14, CI 95% 1.01-1.27), and a greater number of painful sites (OR = 1.34, CI 95% 1.05-1.70). Nonlinear effects were observed for sleep disturbances and multisite musculoskeletal pain.
conclusionThis exploratory study highlights a clustered pattern of psychosocial work, working, and clinical factors associated with presenteeism. In line with PROGRESS recommendations, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and require replication/confirmation in larger, independent cohorts. Such work may inform future prognostic models and guide occupational health interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.