Table 2.

Methods and risk of bias analyses in cohort and intervention studies.

Authord	Pub. year	Country	Occupation	N	RRb	Age rangec	ROB scorea
Intervention studies
[40] Chen	2009	Israel	ICT user	218	nn	nn	4
[43] Torp	2008	Norway	Care givers	19	nn	57–85	3
Cohort studies
[34] Kouvonen	2015	Finland	Computer jobs	370	67	49–61	5
[55] Stenfors	2012	Sweden	Different sectors	3644	65	16–64	5
[56] De Croon	2004	Netherlands	Lorry driver	73	72	μ = 42;SD = 9	4
[54] Choi	2002	USA	Social worker	244	76.5	20–58	2

^aROB score: Risk of bias analysis. Scores marked in bold show a high risk of bias; unmarked scores have a medium risk of bias.

^bRR: response rate nn: not named in the article.

^cμ: mean age; SD: standard deviation, nn: not named in the article.

^dOnly first author is named.