Skip to main content

Table 4 Results from models with significant interaction effects between affective disorders and personality or work circumstances a

From: The impact of conscientiousness, mastery, and work circumstances on subsequent absenteeism in employees with and without affective disorders

  Odds Ratio p-value 95% C.I.
Interaction model 1. Affective disorders  x conscientiousness
 Main effect depressive disorder 2.35 <.001 1.50–3.69
 Main effect anxiety disorder 1.13 .63 .70–1.82
 Main effect comorbid disorder 1.65 .04 1.02–2.65
 Main effect conscientiousness 0.75 .045 .56–.99
 Depressive disorder x conscientiousness 1.58 .06 .99–2.51
 Anxiety disorder x conscientiousness 2.05 .003 1.27–3.31
 Comorbid disorder x conscientiousness 1.61 .03 1.06–2.47
Interaction model 2. Affective disorders x job demands
 Main effect depressive disorder 2.47 <.001 1.55–3.93
 Main effect anxiety disorder 1.32 .24 .83–2.11
 Main effect comorbid disorder 1.74 .03 1.07–2.84
 Main effect job demands 0.82 .13 .63–1.06
 Depressive disorder x job demands 1.67 .03 1.07–2.62
 Anxiety disorder x job demands 1.42 .13 .91–2.21
 Comorbid disorder x job demands 1.33 .15 .90–1.96
  1. a Variables not shown in the table are: gender, education, age, chronic diseases, previous absenteeism, conscientiousness (only model 2), job demands (only model 1), mastery, job support, job control. All independent variables except dichotomous ones are standardized
\