The appraisal of chronic stress and the development of the metabolic syndrome: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies

in Endocrine Connections

Chronic psychosocial stress has been proposed as a risk factor for the development of the metabolic syndrome (MES). This review gives a systematic overview of prospective cohort studies investigating chronic psychosocial stress as a risk factor for incident MES and the individual elements of MES. Thirty-nine studies were included. An association between chronic psychosocial stress and the development of MES was generally supported. Regarding the four elements of MES: i) weight gain: the prospective studies supported etiological roles for relationship stress, perceived stress, and distress, while the studies on work-related stress (WS) showed conflicting results; ii) dyslipidemi: too few studies on psychosocial stress as a risk factor for dyslipidemia were available to draw a conclusion; however, a trend toward a positive association was present; iii) type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2): prospective studies supported perceived stress and distress as risk factors for the development of DM2 among men, but not among women, while WS was generally not supported as a risk factor among neither men nor women; iv) hypertension: marital stress and perceived stress might have an influence on blood pressure (BP), while no association was found regarding distress. Evaluating WS the results were equivocal and indicated that different types of WS affected the BP differently between men and women. In conclusion, a longitudinal association between chronic psychosocial stress and the development of MES seems present. However, the number of studies with sufficient quality is limited and the design of the studies is substantially heterogeneous.

Abstract

Chronic psychosocial stress has been proposed as a risk factor for the development of the metabolic syndrome (MES). This review gives a systematic overview of prospective cohort studies investigating chronic psychosocial stress as a risk factor for incident MES and the individual elements of MES. Thirty-nine studies were included. An association between chronic psychosocial stress and the development of MES was generally supported. Regarding the four elements of MES: i) weight gain: the prospective studies supported etiological roles for relationship stress, perceived stress, and distress, while the studies on work-related stress (WS) showed conflicting results; ii) dyslipidemi: too few studies on psychosocial stress as a risk factor for dyslipidemia were available to draw a conclusion; however, a trend toward a positive association was present; iii) type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2): prospective studies supported perceived stress and distress as risk factors for the development of DM2 among men, but not among women, while WS was generally not supported as a risk factor among neither men nor women; iv) hypertension: marital stress and perceived stress might have an influence on blood pressure (BP), while no association was found regarding distress. Evaluating WS the results were equivocal and indicated that different types of WS affected the BP differently between men and women. In conclusion, a longitudinal association between chronic psychosocial stress and the development of MES seems present. However, the number of studies with sufficient quality is limited and the design of the studies is substantially heterogeneous.

Introduction

The metabolic syndrome (MES) is a cluster of risk factors including male adiposity, dyslipidemia, reduced glucose tolerance and hypertension. MES is highly prevalent and increasing in most parts of the world (1). A meta-analysis has shown that MES increases the risk of myocardial infarction, cardiovascular disease, and cardiovascular disease mortality by twofold (1). Therapies based on lifestyle intervention, especially weight loss, are the main focus in treating MES. However, the etiology seems multifactorial, which calls for new areas of prevention and intervention. One potential risk factor for the development of MES is chronic psychosocial stress, in the following referred to as stress.

In general it is accepted to divide the stress-concept into stressors (strain), stress (the bodily reaction to stressors), and distress (the emotional consequences as reactions to the stressors) (2). Stress occurs when the sum of stressors exceeds an individual threshold. The stress-response is then initiated with activation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis and the sympathetic–adrenomedullar (SAM) axis (3). The activation of the two axes takes place in order to maintain the dynamic balance of the body, homeostasis, and is a necessary defence mechanism in situations of acute stress. However, if stress persists a state designated allostatic-load or chronic stress is reached, which among other things results in distress, reduced quality of life, or depression (4). There is no general consensus on how to measure chronic stress. Some have used physiological changes from the activation of the HPA- and SAM-axes as measures of stress: i.e. cortisol, noradrenalin, blood pressure (BP), or resting pulse (5). However, these parameters fluctuate, have great inter-individual variability, and reflect mostly acute stress-load (6). For these reasons, we will not consider the physiological stress-measures as markers of chronic psychosocial stress in this review.

Others have used the number of stressors as a measure of exposure. Example: the number of major life events or hours of work (7). However, the capacity for coping with stressors is dependent on the balance between e.g. the perception of the stressor, individual resources, and coping-mechanisms, and thus the appraised stress caused by the exposure to stressors varies greatly between individuals. This makes the number of stressors by themselves of questionable value as measures of stress. Thus, in the following, we exclude studies measuring only stressors, and focus on studies measuring the appraisal of stress, including reactions to both single and multiple stressors.

The best measure for quantifying the effect of chronic stress is so far by questionnaires (Qs). A variety of Qs have been used for the evaluation of stress. Outside of the working field the most frequently used scale is the Perceived Stress Scale by Cohen. It measures the degree to which situations in one's life are appraised as stressful rated by ten questions on feelings and thoughts during the last month (8). In the occupational area, the most widely used Q's are the Job Demand Control model by Karasek et al. (9) and the Effort–Reward Imbalance model by Siegrist et al. (10, 11), which both are usable for evaluating work stress (WS). Another way of evaluating stress is by measuring distress which emerges when the allostatic load is reached for the individual subject and only when stress has been in progress for some time. Distress is mostly evaluated by the general health questionnaire (GHQ) by Goldberg & Williams (12), measuring the inability to carry out normal functions and the appearance of distressing experiences.

The aim of the present review is to draw a synthesis from prospective cohort studies, in which chronic stress, measured by Qs, has been evaluated as potential risk factors for the development of MES as well as for the individual components of MES.

Subjects and methods

Search strategy

A systematic search in PubMed was done using the following keywords and their combinations: Metabolic syndrome, Abdominal fat, Body mass index, Weight gain, Weight change, Obesity, adiposity, Dyslipidemia, Cholesterol, Blood pressure, Hypertension, Hyperglycemia, Insulin resistance, Diabetes mellitus, Blood glucose, Psychological stress, Psychosocial stress, Work stress, Job stress, Strain, Prospective, Cohort, and Longitudinal.

Web of Science was used to search for references and citations from selected articles.

Articles were limited to human studies from February 1990 to October 2013 written in English. Bibliographies of relevant citations were screened for further articles of relevance.

Criteria for inclusion

In order to evaluate the causality between chronic stress and the elements of the MES, we included only prospective cohort studies. Studies were included if stress was evaluated by Qs, measuring the appraisal of stress in general (perceived stress) by Q's measuring, e.g. stress from relationships, by appraised WS or by standardized Qs on WS as e.g. effort–reward imbalance or job strain (job demands/control imbalance).

The outcome of the studies should be the diagnosis of MES defined according to general accepted classifications (i.e. from WHO, NCEP, and IDF; Box 1) or by each of the individual components of MES: adiposity, reduced glucose tolerance, dyslipidemia, or elevated blood pressure.

Box 1

Download Figure

Box 1

Clinical criteria for the metabolic syndrome.

Citation: Endocrine Connections 3, 2; 10.1530/EC-14-0031

Studies were limited to adults (>18 years of age). When more than two data-categories were reported, the extremes were compared, i.e. ’highest’ vs ’lowest’ category of perceived stress, thus excluding the intermediate groups. When models with different numbers of adjustments were available, the most adjusted model was included excluding the intermediate analyses. When analyses were separated by gender, the individual gender results were included rather than the results based on mixed gender analyses.

Criteria for exclusion

Studies covering prenatal stress, childhood adverse events, depression, anxiety, hostility, fatigue, or personality types were excluded as were studies measuring the number of stressful life events. Studies measuring physiological stress (such as oxidative stress, cold or heat-shock responses) and studies evaluating stress by a physiological measure such as cortisol or noradrenalin were also excluded. With regard to WS, stress measured as physically challenging work, shift work, or hours of work was excluded to keep the focus on the psychosocial working conditions.

When later follow-up studies were published on the same cohort, any previous reports on the cohort addressing the same subject were excluded unless different exposure or outcome was measured.

The literature review conformed to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement standards (13). The heterogeneity of study designs and the limited numbers of studies available precluded a meta-analysis.

Results

Thirty-nine studies were eligible and included. The characteristics and findings of the studies are presented in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Table 1

Stress and the metabolic syndrome, prospective cohort studies.

ReferencesStudy designSample sizeExposureOutcomeAdjusted forGroups comparedMost adjusted results
(15)4 years cohort216 couplesSix questions on marital adjustmentMES as defined by the NCEP ATP IIIGender, age, income, current and previous smoking, alcohol use, depressive symptoms, physical activity, and baseline MES criteriasPartner reported marital adjustment (higher score, poorer marital adjustment)Men: OR (95% CI), 1.02 (0.39–2.68)
Women: OR (95% CI), 10.2 (1.54–68.2)
The ELSA studyActor reported marital adjustmentMen: OR (95% CI), 0.84 (0.21–3.41)
Women: OR (95% CI): 0.37 (0.83–1.67)
(19)5 years cohort1408 men and 1558 womenJob Strain QMES as defined by the NCEP ATP IIIAge, race, physical activity, smoking status, education, family income, daily alcohol consumption, and depression scoreHigh job strain vs low job strainMen: HR (95% CI), 1.8 (0.9–3.6)
The CARDIA studyWomen: HR (95% CI), 2.2 (1.0–4.6)
(16)6.4 years cohort466 men and womenGeneral health QMES as defined by NCEP ATP IIIAge, gender, psychological distress, socio-economic status, smoking status, use of alcohol, leisure time physical activity, hsCRP, and General health Q12High psychological distress vs low psychological distressMen and women: OR (95% CI), 1.81 (1.03–3.18)
A study cohort of middle aged subjects from Finland
(18)18 years cohort4398 men and 1923 womenJustice at work scaleMES as defined by NCEP ATP IIIAge, ethnicity, and employment gradeLow justice at work vs high justice at workMen: HR (95% CI), 0.75 (0.63–0.89)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: HR (95% CI), 0.88 (0.67–1.17)
(7)15 years cohort523 womenPerceived stress scaleMES as defined by WHO, NCEP ATP III, and IDFAge, physical activity, alcohol consumption, smoking status, use of HRT, and level of educationPerceived stress vs no perceived stressWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.59 (1.11–2.30)
The Healthy Women Study CohortWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.19 (0.96–1.47)
Women: OR (95% CI), 1.11 (0.90–1.36)
(17)14 years cohort10 308 men and womenJob demand control QMES as defined by NCEP ATP IIIAge, employment grade, and health behavioursGreater than or equal to three exposures of job strain vs no exposure of job strainMen and women: OR (95% CI), 2.29 (1.27–4.12)
The Whitehall II study cohort
(14)The Healthy Women Study Cohort11.5 years cohort413 womenStudy specific seven-item measure of marital qualityMES as defined by NCEP ATP IIIAge, baseline metabolic syndrome, length of follow-up, race, education, smoking history, hormone use, physical activity, alcohol consumption, depression, anxiety, and social supportMarital dissatisfied vs marital satisfiedWomen: OR (95% CI), 3.02 (1.46–6.24)

Bold indicates significant results. OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; CVD, cardiovascular disease; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; FBG, fasting blood glucose; PG, plasma glucose.

Table 2

Stress and adiposity, prospective cohort studies.

ReferencesStudy designSample sizeExposureOutcomeAdjusted forGroups comparedMost adjusted results
(29)5–7 years cohort7332 men and womenJob content QWeight gain Age, baseline weight, alcohol consumption, smoking, physical exercise, limiting longstanding illness, common mental disorders, and employment status at the follow-upLow job strain vs high job strainMen: OR (95% CI), 1.07 (0.70–1.63)
The Helsinki Health Study cohortWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.15 (0.95–1.38)
(35)3 years cohort136 men and 3647 women COPSO QBMI gainAnalyses on role conflicts were adjusted for: age, cohabitation, type of work position, seniority, and physical work demands. No adjustments were made regarding meaning of workMeaning of workMen: OR (95% CI), 1.1 (0.75–1.62)
The COPSOQ-studyWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.02 (0.95–1.09)
BMI lossMen: OR (95% CI), 1.95 (1.04–3.66)
Women: OR (95% CI), 1.07 (0.97–1.19)
BMI gain Role conflictsMen: OR (95% CI), 1.00 (0.74–1.35)
Women: OR (95% CI), 1.13 (1.06–1.19)
BMI lossMen: OR (95% CI), 0.84 (0.54–1.31)
Women: OR (95% CI), 1.02 (0.93–1.11)
(26)2 years cohort3224 men and womenCOPSO QChange in BMIAge, sex, education, personal annual income, leadership responsibilities of other employees, shiftwork, number of stressful life events in the last 6 months, neuroticism and extraversion, and lonelinessHigher demandB-estimate (95% CI)
The PRISME studyLower decision latitude0.16 (−0.14 to 0.45)
Lower social support−0.17 (−0.64 to 0.30)
Higher effort–reward imbalance−0.003 (−0.30 to 0.24)
0.11 (−0.59 to 0.80)
(20)11.2 years cohort3703 men and women Close person Q>10% increase in BMIGender, age, marital status, ethnicity, baseline BMI, employment grade, smoking status, moderate physical activity, vigorous physical activity, daily fruit and vegetable consumption, and common mental disorderPer one-unit increase in the negative aspects scoreOR (95% CI), 1.06 (1.02–1.10)
The Whitehall II study cohort3224 men and women>10% increase in waist circumference (WC)Per one-unit increase in the negative aspects scoreOR (95% CI), 1.06 (1.02–1.10)
(16)6.4 years cohort466 men and womenGeneral health QWC >102 cm in men or >88 cm in womenBaseline value of psychological distressHigh psychological distress vs low psychological distressOR (95% CI), 2.5 (1.5–4.0)
A study cohort of middle aged subjects from Finland
(27)2 years cohort52 men and 20 womenJob demand control QChange in BMIAge, gender, baseline BMI, and educationJob-demand control imbalanceNo significant association
A cohort of employees from a Swiss service providerEffort–reward imbalance QEffort–rewards imbalanceNo significant association
(25)4 years cohort1670 men and womenKessler 6 scale on psychological distressChange in BMIAge, sex, country of birth, marital status, income, alcohol consumption, and smokingLow psychological distress vs high psychological distressDecreased BMI: OR (95% CI), 1.08 (0.69–1.70)
The longitudinal study of Australian Children cohortIncreased BMI: OR (95% CI), 1.38 (1.00–1.90)
(18)18 years cohort4398 men and 1923 womenJustice at work QWC >120 cm in men or >88 cm in womenAge, ethnicity, and employment gradeLow justice at work vs high justice at workMen: HR (95% CI), 0.68 (0.56–0.82)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: HR (95% CI), 0.80 (0.64–0.98)
(22)13 years cohort416 men and 757 womenPerceived stress scaleChange in BMI Stress, age, baseline BMI, smoking, education, occupation, and financial strainHighest tertile of perceived stress vs lowest tertile of perceived stressMen: β (s.e.m.)=−0.46 (2.37), P=0.846
The Pitt County studyWomen: β (s.e.m.)=3.49 (1.76), P=0.048
(36)5 years cohort4424 men and 5488 womenJob content QChange in BMIAge, smoking, education level, marital status, country of birth, exercise pattern, and baseline BMI quartilesLongstanding job strain vs no job strainWomen: 40–59 years old, P<0.019
Women: 18–39 and 60–80 years old, NS
Men all ages, NS
(21)9.2 years cohort1355 men and womenStudy specific scales on job-related demands, perceived constraint in life, strain in relations with family, strain in relation with spouse/partner, and strain in relation with friendsChange in BMI BMI, age, race, income, generalized anxiety disorder, panic attack, depression, smoking, diabetes, self-rated health, and self-rated relative healthJob-related demandsMen: β (s.e.m.)=0.16 (0.04), P<0.001
The MIDUS studyWomen: β (s.e.m.)=0.18 (0.05), P<0.001
Strain in relations with familyMen: β (s.e.m.)=0.04 (0.04), P=0.34
Women: β (s.e.m.)=0.08 (0.03), P=0.016
Perceived constraint in lifeMen: β (s.e.m.)=−0.001 (0.02), P=0.96
Women: β (s.e.m.)=0.06 (0.02), P<0.001
(30)10 years cohort328 men and womenStudy specific question about mental strain at workWeight gain >15 kg Age, BMI, occupational status, and educationIncreased job stress vs stable or decreasedMen: OR (95% CI), 0.8 (0.4–1.4)
A cohort of employees from the engineering industry in FinlandWomen: OR (95% CI), 2.0 (0.9–4.8)
28 years cohort305 men and womenEffort–reward imbalanceLow effort–reward imbalance vs high effort reward imbalanceMen: OR (95% CI), 1.7 (0.7–4.4)
Women: OR (95% CI), 0.6 (0.2–2.6)
(31)6 years cohort2200 men and 1371 womenJob demand control QChange in BMI above the 75th percentileAge, sedentary job, shift work, smoking, alcohol, exercise, education, and marital statusHigh job strain vs low job strainMen: OR (95% CI), 1.23 (0.95–1.59)
A cohort of employees from a factory in JapanWomen: OR (95% CI), 0.92 (0.66–1.29)
Change in WC above the 75th percentileMen: OR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.07–1.79)
Women: OR (95% CI), 1.78 (1.26–2.52)
(34)19 years cohort6895 men and 3413 womenJob demand control QChange in BMIAge, height, employment grade, education, and health behaviorsOver three episodes of iso-strain vs no iso-strainMen: OR (95% CI), 1.92 (1.13–3.24)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: OR (95% CI), 3.38 (1.16–9.80)
Change in WCOver three episodes of iso-strain vs no iso-strainMen: OR (95% CI), 1.46 (1.14–1.87)
Women: OR (95% CI), 2.26 (0.78–6.54)
(32)5 years cohort5547 men and 2418 womenModified version of the job demand control QAge, employment grade, and baseline BMIThe association between job strain at baseline and BMI at follow-upMen: B (P value): 0.005 (0.82)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: B (P value): 0.062 (0.14)
Weight gain among those with highest quartile of baseline BMIPer 1 s.d. increase in job strainOR (95% CI), 1.22 (1.06–1.41)
Weight gain among those with bottom quartile of BMI at baselinePer 1 s.d. increase in job strainOR (95% CI), 0.88 (0.76–1.01)
Weight loss among those with highest quartile of BMI at baselinePer 1 s.d. increase in job strainOR (95% CI), 0.82 (0.71–0.94)
Weight loss among those with bottom quartile of BMI at baselinePer 1 s.d. increase in job strainOR (95% CI), 1.14 (0.99–1.32)
(28)25.6 years cohort545 men and 267 womenWork demands and job control QMean BMISex, age, and baseline BMILow vs high job strainP=0.151
A cohort of employees from factories in FinlandQ on effort–reward imbalanceLow vs high effort–reward imbalanceP=0.002
(33)4–7 years cohort2511 men and 443 womenJob satisfaction measured by the Reeder Stress Inventory QChange in BMIAge and occupational factorsAssociation between job satisfaction and change in BMI: dissatisfied with job at both baseline and follow-upRegressions coefficient (95% CI)
A cohort of employees from workplaces in ScotlandMen: −0.44 (−0.89 to 0.00)
Women: 1.35 (−0.34 to 3.01)
(24)15 years cohort2152 men and 2721 womenStudy specific Q on stress of daily activities Weight gain >10 kgAge, BMI, education, dieting, alcohol consumption, and smoking pregnancyHigh level of stress vs low level of stressMen, 18–29 years: OR (95% CI), 1.06 (0.56–2.03)
Women, 18–29 years: OR (95% CI), 1.13 (0.63–2.04)
Men, 30–54 years: OR (95% CI), 2.77 (1.06–7.26)
Women, 30–54 years: OR (95% CI), 1.35 (0.68–2.66)
(23)7 years cohort438 menSelf-reported stress levelWeight gainNo adjustments Self-reported stress levelMen: correlation between self-reported stress level at baseline and weight change, NS
A cohort of firefighters, paramedics and fire service administrator
Table 3

Stress and dyslipidemia, prospective cohort studies.

ReferencesStudy designSample sizeExposureOutcomeAdjusted forGroups comparedMost adjusted results
(16)6.4 years cohort466 men and womenGeneral health QTriglycerides >1.7 mMBaseline value of psychological distressHigh psychological distress vs low psychological distressOR (95% CI), ∼1.7 (0.9–3.2)
A study cohort of middle aged subjects from FinlandHDL cholesterol <1.03 mM in men and <1.29 mM in womenOR (95% CI), ∼2.5 (1.4–4.0)
(18)18 years cohort4398 men and 1923 womenJustice at work QTriglycerides >1.7 mM or on lipid lowering medicationAge, ethnicity, and employment gradeLow justice at work vs high justice at workMen: HR (95% CI), 0.82 (0.73–0.92)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: HR (95% CI), 1.14 (0.2–1.41)
HDL cholesterol <1.03 mM in men and <1.3 mM in women, or on lipid lowering medicationMen: HR (95% CI), 0.85 (0.74–0.98)
Women: HR (95% CI), 1.04 (0.84–1.30)
(37)10 years cohort7066 men and womenTwo questions on stress each rated on a four-point likert scale, combined into a seven-point stress score Change from normal to high cholesterol (total cholesterol </>6.22 mM)Sex, age, education, and marital statusLow stress vs high stressMen and women: OR (95% CI), 0.88 (0.68–1.15)
The Copenhagen City Heart Study
(28)25.6 years cohort545 men and 267 womenWork demands and job control QSerum total cholesterolSex, age, baseline cholesterolLow vs high job strainMen and women, P=0.05
A cohort of employees from factories in FinlandQ on effort–reward imbalanceLow vs high effort–reward imbalanceMen and women, P=0.033
Table 4

Stress and diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2), prospective cohort studies.

ReferencesStudy designSample sizeExposureOutcomeAdjusted forGroups comparedMost adjusted results
(44)8 years (women) – 10 years cohort (men)2227 men and 3205 womenDemand-decision latitude QIncident pre-diabetes or DM measured with OGGTAge, educational level, psychological distress, family history of diabetes, BMI, physical activity, smoking, and civil statusJob strain vs no job strainMen: OR (95% CI), 0.5 (0.3–0.9)
Stockholm Diabetes Prevention ProgramHigh demands/low decision latitude yes vs noWomen: OR (95% CI), 2.1 (0.9–4.8)
Men: OR (95% CI), 0.8 (0.4–1.7)
Women: OR (95% CI), 4.2 (2.0–8.7)
(40)35 years cohort7251 menOne Q on self-perceived stress during the last 5 yearsIncident DM from registries as principal or secondary diagnosisAge, socio-economic status, BMI, SBP, use of anti-hypertensive medication, and physical inactivityPermanent stress vs no stressMen: HR (95% CI), 1.45 (1.20–1.75)
Multifactor Primary Prevention Trial Study
(41)5 years cohort3759 men and womenPerceived stress QOGTTAge, education, physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption, sedentary behavior, adiposity, baseline SBP, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, and fasting blood glucoseHighest level of perceived stress vs lowest level of perceived stressMen: OR (95% CI), 1.18 (0.73–1.90)
The Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle StudyWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.72 (1.07–2.76)
(43)18 years cohort9514 men and womenGeneral health QSelf-reported DMAge, female sex, marital status, education level, annual household income, energy, health status, health problems, activity, and smokingHigh psychological distress vs low-psychological distressMen and women: HR (95% CI), 1.10 (0.91–1.34)
The British Household Panel Survey
(49)9 years cohort3691 men and 3752 womenJob content QIncident DM classified as respondent with one hospital admission with a DM diagnosis, or two physician service claims with a DM diagnosisAge, immigration status, ethnicity, marital status, living location, and education. Baseline heart disease, hypertension, and depression. Activity limitations at work due to health problems, shift schedule, weeks worked, multiple jobs, physical activity at work, BMI, smoking, alcohol, leisure time physical activity, fruit, and vegetable consumptionHigh job control vs low job controlMen: HR (95% CI), 0.92 (0.56–1.51)
The Canadian Community Health SurveyHigh psychosocial demands vs low psychosocial demandsWomen: HR (95% CI), 2.04 (1.15–3.61)
Men: HR (95% CI), 0.77 (0.48–1.23)
Women: HR (95% CI), 0.76 (0.43–1.33)
(51)3.4 years cohort5843 men and womenJob demands QFPG ≥7.0 or HbA1c ≥6.5 or physician diagnosed DM, or use of diabetic medicationAge, gender, education, family history of diabetes, smoking history, sport intensity, and depressive symptomsLogistics regressions predicting the incidence of diabetes by perceived job controlMen and women: OR (95% CI), 1.05 (0.85–1.15)
Study cohort from Sourasky Medical Center (Tel Aviv)
(46)18 years cohort3689 men and 1449 womenJob strain QOGTT ≥11.1 mM or FPG ≥7.0 or reported previously diagnosed DM or use of diabetic medicationAge, employment grade, diet pattern, alcohol consumption, physical activity, smoking status, SBP, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterolJob strain in non-obese vs no job strain in non-obeseMen: HR (95% CI), 0.70 (0.53–0.93)
The Whitehall II study cohortJob strain in obese vs no job strain in non-obeseWomen: HR (95% CI), 1.18 (0.63–2.10)
Men: HR (95% CI), 1.05 (0.63–1.75)
Women: HR (95% CI), 2.01 (1.06–3.82)
(16)6.4 years cohort466 men and womenGeneral health QFPG ≥5.6 mMBaseline value of psychological distressHigh psychological distress vs low psychological distressMen and women: OR (95% CI), 1.2 (0.75–2.0)
A study cohort of middle aged subjects from Finland
(18)18 years cohort4398 men and 1923 womenJustice at work QFPG >6.1 mM or on antidiabetic medicationAge, ethnicity, and employment gradeLow justice at work vs high justice at workMen: HR (95% CI), 1.09 (0.87–1.36)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: HR (95% CI), 0.80 (0.54–1.19)
(37)10 years cohort7066 men and womenTwo questions on stressSelf-reported incident DMSex, age, education, and marital statusHigh level of stress vs low level of stressMen: OR (95% CI), 2.36 (1.22–4.59)
The Copenhagen City Heart StudyWomen: OR (95% CI), 0.80 (0.33–1.91)
(38)10 years cohort55 826 men and womenPerceived mental stress QSelf-reported incident DMAge, BMI, smoking status, alcohol consumption, family history of DM, physical activity, history of hypertension, coffee consumption, type A behavior, and hours of sleepHigh level of stress vs low level of stressMen: OR (95% CI), 1.36 (1.13–1.63)
The JPHC Cohort StudyWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.22 (0.98–1.51)
(42)10 years cohort2127 men and 3100 womenPsychological distress rated on a five question-QIncident DM, defined as OGTT ≥11.1 or FPG ≥7.0 or diagnosed DMAge, BMI, family history of diabetes, smoking, physical activity, and socio-economic positionHighest level of distress vs lowest level of distressMen: 2.2 (1.2–4.1)
The Stockholm Diabetes Prevention ProgramWomen: 0.5 (0.2–1.2)
(39)3.2 years cohort128 men Perceived stress QIncident DM, defined as OGTT ≥11.1 or FPG ≥7.0 or non-fasting plasma glucose level >11.1 mMAge, BMI, SBT, ALT, LDH, γ-GTP, ALP, protein, creatinine, triglyceride, HDL-C, LDL-C, uric acid, S-amylase, ESR, WBC, hgb, FBG, urinary protein, night duty, blue-collar job, administrative position, business bachelor, stress in daily life, satisfaction with lifestyle, fatigue, alcohol drinking, and current smokingStress in daily life vs no stress in daily lifeMen: HR (95% CI), 3.82 (1.09–13.35)
Japanese company employees cohort
(48)5.7 years cohort62 574 womenJob demand-control QIncident DM defined as one or more classic diabetic symptoms and FPG ≥7.8 mM or a random PG ≥11.1 mM or treatment with hypoglycemic medication or OGTT ≥11.1Age, BMI, family history of diabetes, work hours, rotating night-shift work, hours at work sitting, job support, hours per week of work at home, leisure-time physical activity, smoking, alcohol intake, transunsaturated fat intake, glycemic load, caffeine intake, marital status, number of children, menopausal status, vitamin supplementation, and aspirin useHigh demands and low decision latitude vs low demands and low decision latitudeWomen: RR (95% CI), 1.11 (0.80–1.52)
Nurses Health Study II from the U.S.
(50)10.5 years cohort8630 men and womenJob demand-control QIncident DM defined as OGTT ≥11.1 or FPG ≥7.0 or diagnosed DMAge, length of follow-up, employment grade, ethnic group, ECG abnormalities, family history of diabetes, BMI, high systolic blood pressure, exercise, smoking, and life eventsEffort–reward imbalanceMen: OR (95% CI), 1.65 (1.0–2.8)
The Whitehall II study cohortHigh job demands vs low job demandsWomen: OR (95% CI), 0.93 (0.4–2.0)
Men: OR (95% CI), 1.07 (0.7–1.6)
Women: OR (95% CI), 0.52 (0.3–1.1)
(47)8 years cohort2597 menJob demand-control QIncident DM defined as OGTT ≥11.1 or FPG ≥7.0 or self-reported diagnosed DMAge, education, BMI, alcohol consumption, smoking, leisure time physical activity, and family history of NIDDMJob strain vs no job strainMen: HR (95% CI), 1.34 (0.50–3.55)
Japanese company employees cohort

ALP, alkaline phosphatase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; DM, diabetes mellitus; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; γ-GTP, gamma-glutamyl-transpeptidase; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; PG, plasma glucose; SBP, systolic blood pressure; WBC, white blood count.

Table 5

Stress and hypertension, prospective cohort studies.

ReferencesStudy designSample sizeExposureOutcomeAdjusted forGroups comparedMost adjusted results
(63)3 years cohort629 men and 966 womenSiegrist QAmbulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP) >135 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >85 mmHg Age, sex, education, income, marital status, BMI, WC, family history of CVD, medication, diabetes, smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, leisure time physical activity, and overcommitmentNever exposed by effort–reward imbalance vs exposed at both baseline and follow-upCumulative incidence rate (95% CI):
A cohort of white-collar workers from Quebec CityMen: 1.04 (0.56–1.95)
Women <45 years old: 1.20 (0.53–2.75)
Women >45 years old: 2.78 (1.26–6.10)
(55)3.5 years cohort11 777 men and 49 145 womenThe Workplace Social Capital ScaleChronic hypertension based on health insurance examination, demanding high BP over 6 months followed by 6 months of antihypertensive treatment (office SBP >200 or DBP >95)Age, sex, SES, marital status, employer, employment time and the size, proportion of male employees, geographic location of the work unit, and co-morbid diabetes or depressionLow vs high self-assessed workplace social capitalMen: HR (95% CI), 1.38 (1.00–1.90)
The Finnish Public Sector StudyJob strain QAge onlyHigh job strain vs low job strainWomen: HR (95% CI), 1.10 (0.92—1.31)
Men and women: HR (95% CI), 1.10 (0.97–1.25)
(16)6.4 years cohort466 men and womenGeneral health QOffice BP >130/85 mmHg or use of antihypertensive treatmentBaseline value of psychological distressHigh psychological distress vs low psychological distressMen and women: OR (95% CI), 0.75 (0.4–1.1)
A study cohort of middle aged subjects from Finland
(18)18 years cohort4398 men and 1923 womenJustice at work QOffice BP >130/85 mmHg or antihypertensive treatmentAge, ethnicity, and employment gradeLow justice at work vs high justice at workMen: OR (95% CI), 0.86 (0.78–0.95)
The Whitehall II study cohortWomen: OR (95% CI), 1.02 (0.87–1.19)
(37)10 years cohort7066 men and womenTwo questions on stressStart using antihypertensive medication during follow-upSex, age, education, marital statusHigh stress vs low stressMen and women: OR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.05–1.84)
The Copenhagen City Heart Study
(52)1 year cohort106 men and 123 womenJob content QChange in ambulatory 24 h SBPAge, gender, ethnic background, premature coronary artery disease, education, BMI, smoking, alcohol use, participation in a stress management or relaxation technique program, regular exercise, and total family incomeJob strain Men and women: parameter estimate 13.2 (P=0.008)
The Double Exposure StudyDyadic adjustment scaleLow marital cohesionMen and women: parameter estimate 0.219 (P=0.17)
Job strain×cohesionMen and women: parameter estimate, −0.946 (P=0.006)
(59)6.5 years cohort448 men and womenJob demand-control QChange in systolic office BPAge, follow-up time, BP treatment, baseline BP, and years of educationJob strain vs no job strainMen: Δ4.6 (2.1) mmHg, P=0.045
The Malmø Diet and Cancer StudyChange in diastolic office BPWomen: Δ2.1 (1.7) mmHg, P=0.8
Men: Δ4.1 (1.1) mmHg P=0.004
Women: Δ 0.3 mmHg, (1.0) P=0.5
(57)11 years cohort5630 men and 2456 womenJob strain: four questions on job demand and 15 on job controlHypertension defined as ambulatory SBP ≥140 mmHg and DBP ≥90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive treatmentAge, sex, ethnicity, and employment gradeIncrease in prevalence (hypertension) per year between low strain, passive, active and high strain groupsMen and women: P=0.63
The Whitehall II study cohortIncrease in SBPP=0.63
Increase in DBPP=0.81
(58)7.5 years cohort3483 men and womenJob demand-control QIncrease in office SBPBaseline BPHighest quintile for job strain at baseline and at follow-up vs never exposedMen: RR (95% CI), 1.33 (1.01–1.76)
A cohort of white-collar workers from Quebec CityWomen: RR (95% CI), 1.15 (0.93–1.41)
Increase in office DBPHighest quintile for job strain at baseline and at follow-up vs never exposedMen: RR (95% CI), 1.07 (0.84–1.36)
Women: RR (95% CI), 1.06 (0.85–1.31)
(61)8 years cohort3200 men and womenJob demand-control QOffice SBP >160, DBP >95, or start of using antihypertensive medication during follow-upAge, BMI, baseline SBP, examination site, education level, and change in BMIChange in decision latitudeMen and women: OR (95% CI) =1.02 (0.98–1.06)
The CARDIA studyChange in job demandsMen and women: OR (95% CI) =1.05 (1.01–1.09)
Change in ratio of job demands and decision latitudeMen and women: OR (95% CI) =2.06 (1.01–4.26)
(56)5 years cohort209 men and womenJob demand-control Q24-h ambulatory SBPGender, age, alcohol intake, BMI, occupation, and sodium intakeHigh job strain at both entry and follow-up vs no job strain at either entry or follow-upMen and women: SBP, 118±2 vs 120±1 mmHg, NS
A cohort of employees from a chemical company in France24-h ambulatory DBPMen and women: DBP, 76±2 vs 77±1 mmHg, NS
(33)4–7 years cohort2511 men and 443 womenJob satisfaction measured by the Reeder Stress Inventory QChange in office DBPAge and occupational factorsAssociation between job satisfaction and change in DBP. Dissatisfied with job at both baseline and follow-upRegressions coefficient (95% CI):
A cohort of employees from workplaces in ScotlandMen: −1.29 (−3.09 to 0.52)
Women: 6.05 (0.05 to 12.05)
(62)20 years cohort2357 men and womenQs on work-related stressorsStart of using antihypertensive medication during follow-upAge, BMI, physical activity, alcohol consumption, depression, education, smoking, unemployment, race, and job statusWorried about keeping job vs not worried about keeping jobMen: OR: 1.6 (1.1–2.2)
The Alameda county studyWomen: OR: 1.0 (0.7–1.5)
(54)3 years cohort103 men and womenDyadic adjustment scaleIncrease in 24-h ambulatory BPSex, age, BMI, smoking status, alcohol use, practice of relaxation techniques, exercise, and previous antihypertensive medicationLowest quartile of marital cohesion and increase in ambulatory blood pressureMen and women: sr2=0.045, P=0.01
Cohabiting males or femalesLowest quartile of marital satisfaction and increase in ambulatory blood pressureMen and women: sr2=0.024, P=0.05
(60)3 years cohort195 menJob content QChange in ambulatory SBP:Age, BMI, ethnicity, alcohol use, type A behavior, education, and smokingF-test for no significant association between job-strain groups (no–no, no–yes, yes–no, and yes–yes) and mean change in ambulatory BP on different locationsMen: significance of F-test:
The work site blood pressure studyAt workP=0.14
At homeP=0.26
While sleepingP=0.96
Change in ambulatory DBP:
At workP=0.07
At homeP=0.10
While sleeping P=0.17

CVD, cardiovascular disease; SES, socio-economic status.

Association between stress and MES

Seven prospective cohort studies that measured MES as the outcome variable were included: one study evaluated the exposure to global perceived stress (7), two studies evaluated marital stress (14, 15), one study evaluated psychological distress (16), while three studies evaluated the exposure to different measures of WS (17, 18, 19).

The studies not specifically measuring WS were based on two different cohorts: two studies were based on data from The Healthy Women Study Cohort, while one study was based on a cohort of middle-aged white subjects from Finland.

Marital dissatisfaction

On data from the Healthy Women Cohort, a study evaluated the 413 women who had answered seven questions on marital quality (14). The study found that after 11.5 years of follow-up, marital dissatisfied women had a three times higher risk of developing MES as defined by NCEP as compared with marital satisfied women (14). Another study based on 216 married couples, living in England, evaluated marital adjustment and found that husbands' report of poorer marital adjustment at baseline were associated with ten times greater risk of wives having MES as defined by NCEP after 4 years of follow-up (15). However, the wives' reports of poorer marital adjustment did not have significant influence on husbands' risk of developing MES (15).

Perceived stress

From The Healthy Women Study Cohort, a tendency of a higher risk of developing MES as defined by NCEP and IDF was also found among subjects with perceived stress, evaluated in 523 women after 15 years of follow-up (7). When defining MES by the WHO-5 definitions, the association became statistically significant (7).

Distress

From the study based on the Finnish cohort, 466 middle-aged men and women demonstrated that a high score of psychological distress at baseline, evaluated by the General health Q, almost doubled the risk of developing MES as defined by NCEP after a mean of 6.4 years of follow-up (16). The difference remained significant after adjusting for example, socioeconomic status, lifestyle factors, and depression score (16).

Work stress

Three studies evaluated WS based on two different cohorts: Two studies were based on the Whitehall II cohort, consisting of working men and women from 20 civil services departments in London. One study was based on the CARDIA study cohort of citizens from Birmingham, Chicago, Minneapolis, and Oakland.

Based on the Whitehall II cohort, one study demonstrated a significantly dose-dependent association between self-perceived stress at work and the risk of developing MES as defined by NCEP (17). The analyses were not separated by gender. The other Whitehall II study investigated feeling of justice at work, and separating the analyses by gender, they found that a high feeling of justice was associated with a lower risk of developing MES during 18-year follow-up among men, but not among women (18). On the CARDIA study cohort, job strain was evaluated among 1408 men and 1558 women. The study showed that after adjusting for sociodemographic factors, health behaviors and depressive symptoms, women in high strain jobs (high demands/low control) had a significantly increased risk of MES compared with women in low strain jobs after 5 years of follow-up (19). The same trend was found among men; however, the association was only borderline significant (19).

Conclusion

The studies included support an association between perceived stress and distress and the development of MES. Marital stress was also found to be a risk factor, especially among women. However, only one study measuring stress outside of the working area separated the analyses by gender, and two out of four studies included only women. Concerning WS, perceived stress at work was supported as a risk factor for MES. A high feeling of justice at work was suggested as a protective factor among men, while job strain was found to be a risk factor for MES among women. These findings indicate that the sexes might respond differently to different kinds of stress exposures.

Association between stress and the single elements of MES

Stress and adiposity

Nineteen prospective cohort studies evaluating adiposity were included. One study evaluated the exposure to negative aspects of close relationships, one evaluated strain in relations with family and perceived constraint in life, two studies evaluated self-perceived stress, one stress from daily activities, two evaluated distress and 13 studies on ten different cohorts evaluated WS.

As outcome variables four studies measured weight gain, three measured waist circumference (WC), ten measured BMI, and three measured both WC and BMI.

Relationship stress

One study followed over 3000 men and women for 11 years and found that each unit increase in ‘negative aspects of close relationship’ score at baseline slightly increased the risk of a 10% or greater increase of weight gain at follow-up (20). The modest but significant effect was found both when outcome was measured as elevated BMI and as evaluated WC. The analyses were not separated by gender (20). The MIDUS study evaluated strain in relation with family among 1355 men and women and after 9.2 years of follow-up they found family strain to be a risk factor for weight gain among women but not among men (21).

Perceived stress

The MIDUS study also evaluated perceived constraint in life and found a positive association between the level of constraints and weight gain among women, but not among men (21). This was supported by the Pitt County Study that found an association between perceived stress and change in BMI among women but not among men after 13 years of follow-up (22). Further a study including only men from one occupation (fire-workers) found no association between self-reported stress (measured by a nonstandardized Q) and weight gain after 7 years of follow-up (23). A study of the Finnish Twin Cohort separated the results both by gender and age, and found in contrast with the other studies that a high level of stress from daily activities was associated with a weight gain of over 10 kg in middle-aged men, but not among men of other age categories and not among women (24).

Distress

A study of 466 men and women followed for 6.4 years found high psychological distress to increase the risk of weight gain measured as WC (16). This finding was supported by a study of 1670 men and women, which found psychological distress at baseline to be a predictor for increased BMI after 4 years of follow-up (25). Neither of the studies evaluated the results by gender.

Work stress

Three of the 13 studies on WS did not separate their analyses by gender (26, 27, 28). Two of these studies did not find a significant association between WS (effort–reward imbalance and job–demand control imbalance respectively) and increase in BMI (26, 27), while one study found effort–reward imbalance but not job strain to be significantly associated with change in BMI (28).

From the ten studies separating the analyses by gender, five did not support an association between WS and change in weight (measured as weight change or change in BMI) among either gender (29, 30, 31, 32, 33), whereas two studies supported an association between BMI and WS among both genders (21, 34).

Concerning other measures of WS, a study evaluated the feeling of justice at work and found that a feeling of high justice was associated with a lower risk of a large WC (>120 cm for men and >88 cm for women) after 18 years of follow-up among both men and women (18). A study on 3982 female and 152 male Danish health care workers evaluated other psychosocial work characteristics association with change in BMI and among other results they found role conflicts to be associated with a small increased risk of weight gain among women but not men (35).

Separating results by age

Two studies separated their results by age and found age-dependent associations: one study found a high level of stress to be a predictor of major weight gain among middle-aged men (30–54 years old), but not among women and among younger age categories of any gender (24). Likewise, in a 5-year cohort of 4424 men and 5488 women, job strain was found to be significantly associated with change in BMI among middle-aged women, but not among women of other age categories and not among men (36).

Separating results by baseline BMI

In a re-analysis of the Whitehall II cohort, subjects were stratified according to BMI at baseline (32). The study found that men with BMI <22 at baseline experienced a weight loss during WS, whereas men with a BMI >27 increase in weight (P<0.006) (32).

BMI vs WC

Three studies included both BMI and WC as outcome measures, and found that the association between stress and adiposity might be dependent on the outcome measure chosen: one study found job strain to be associated with increased BMI among both men and women, but found job strain to be associated with WC only among men (34). Another study found high job strain to be a risk factor for increased WC but not for BMI among both genders (31). While a study on the Whitehall II cohort, not separating the results by gender, found negative aspects of close relationships to be associated with both increase in WC and in BMI after 11 years (20).

Conclusion

Studies regarding stress from relationships and overall perceived stress generally supported an association between stress and weight gain, especially among women. Distress seems supported as a risk factor for weight gain among both genders. Concerning the association between WS and weight gain, the studies found conflicting results, with approximately half of the studies finding no association, and the other half finding some association among either men or women. Differences have been found between studies measuring WC or BMI as outcome variables. One study found WS to have a bidirectional effect causing both weight gain and weight loss depending on baseline BMI, which might also contribute to the conflicting results found.

Stress and dyslipidemia

We included four studies (on four different cohorts) which prospectively examined the influence of chronic stress on blood lipids: one study focused on perceived stress, one on distress, and two studies focused on WS.

Perceived stress

A study of 7066 men and women followed for 10 years found no association between perceived level of stress and lipid levels at neither baseline, nor at follow-up (37).

Distress

One study found high psychological distress to be a risk factor for low HDL cholesterol levels after 6.4 years among 466 men and women (16). A tendency of a higher risk of elevated triglycerides was also found, although this was not statistically significant (16).

Work stress

Concerning WS, one study followed 4398 men and 1923 women for 18 years and found that low justice at work was associated with the development of reduced HDL cholesterol and elevated triglycerides among men but not among women (18). Another study evaluated job strain and effort–reward imbalance among 545 men and 267 women and found high baseline job strain to be associated with a higher total cholesterol level after 25 years while no association was found regarding effort–reward imbalance (28).

Conclusion

Three out of four studies available supported some association between stress and the development of dyslipidemia. These limited data call for further studies in order to obtain a firm conclusion.

Stress and type 2 diabetes mellitus

Sixteen prospective cohort studies, with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) as outcome variable, were included. Five studies evaluated the exposure of perceived stress, three evaluated distress, while eight studies focused on WS. The studies focusing on other parameters than WS were all based on different cohorts. Three of the included studies on WS were based on data from the Whitehall II cohort, while the remaining five studies were based on different cohorts.

Perceived stress

In a study of 7066 participants men but not women, with a high level of general stress had more than two-times increased risk of developing DM2 during 10 years follow-up (37). This was supported by a study of 55 826 men and women, which found that men, but not women, with a high level of perceived mental stress had a 1.4 higher odds of developing DM2 during 10 years of follow-up as compared with men with a low stress level (38). A higher risk of incident DM2 after 3 years of follow-up was also found among male Japanese employees rating a high level of stress in daily life as compared with employees rating no stress in daily life (39). Likewise, a study of 7251 men showed that self-perceived permanent stress (during the last 5 years) increased the risk of incident DM2, with a hazard ratio of 1.4 after 35 years of follow-up (40). However one study on 3759 Australian men and women did not find an association between high level of perceived stress and development of abnormal glucose tolerance (measured by oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)) among men, but did find an association among women (41).

Distress

One study included 2127 men and 3100 women and found that, after 10 years, men, but not women, with a high level of distress had an increased risk of developing DM2, as compared with persons with low level of distress (42). Another study measuring distress among 9514 men and women found an association between psychological distress and self-reported incident DM after 18 years of follow-up not separating the results by gender (43). However, the association became nonsignificant after controlling for socioeconomic status, e.g. educational level and income, and health status (43). A study on 466 men and women evaluating distress did not support an association between distress level and risk of having fasting glucose ≥5.6 mM after 6.5 years of follow-up (16).

Work stress

A study on middle-aged Swedish men and women found job strain to be associated with a decreased risk of DM2 among 2227 men after 8–10 years of follow-up, while no significant association was found among the 3205 included women (44), although this has been disputed recently by Brunner & Kivimaki (45). Nevertheless, this suggested protective effect of job strain found among men has also been found in a subgroup analysis of the Whitehall II cohort (46): when stratifying the results by baseline BMI, WS was found to be associated with a lower risk of developing DM2 among men with BMI <30, but a higher risk of DM2 among women with BMI >30 (46). No association was found between WS and DM2 among obese men and nonobese women and no association was found when the cohort was not stratified by BMI (46). Another study on 2597 Japanese male company employees found no association in either direction between job strain and the risk of developing DM2 after 8 years of follow-up (47).

With regard to control–demands imbalance the above-mentioned study on middle-aged Swedish men and women also separated WS into high demands/low decision latitude (44). In the study, they found no association between high demands and low decision latitude and DM2 among men, while in women it was associated with a four times increased risk of DM2 (44). In contrast, the Nurses Health Study found no significant association between high demands/low decision latitude and incident DM2 after 5.7 years of follow-up on 62 574 women (48). Regarding job control, another study found a significant association between low job control and development of DM2 among women but not among men after 9 years of follow-up (49). The same study found no association between job demands and incident DM2 among either gender (49). Likewise, a study on 8630 men and women from the Whitehall II cohort found no association between high job demands and DM2 among neither men nor women after 10 years (50). A study of 5843 men and 1449 women found no significant association between job control and DM2, however, not stratifying their results by gender (51).

From the Whitehall II study cohort, data on justice at work and effort–reward imbalance were also evaluated: no association was found between level of justice and incident DM2 after 18 years of follow-up (18). In contrast effort–reward imbalance was found to be a risk factor among men but not among women after 10 years of follow-up (50).

Conclusion

Perceived stress and distress seemed to be risk factors for the development of DM2 among men but not women. The studies on WS showed conflicting results. Overall WS seemed not to be supported as a risk factor for DM2 among either gender, nevertheless two studies supported, respectively, high demands/low decision latitude and job strain as risk factors among women.

Stress and hypertension

Fifteen studies on chronic stress and hypertension have been included. Two studies evaluated the exposure to marital stress on two different cohorts. On individual cohort one study evaluated perceived stress in general and one evaluated distress while 12 studies evaluated exposure to WS based on ten different cohorts. One study evaluated both marital stress and job strain in the same cohort (52).

Six studies evaluated BP by use of ambulatory monitoring (i.e. continuous BP monitoring), seven studies used office BP and two studies measured incident hypertension defined by start of using antihypertensive medication during follow-up. Ambulatory BP has been found to better predict clinical cardiovascular outcomes than office BP and is regarded as the most reliable and reproducible method (53).

Marital stress

One study found that among 103 men and women, low marital cohesion and/or satisfaction was associated with a significantly but small increase in 3-year 24-h diastolic and systolic ambulatory BP (DBP and SBP) (54). The other study evaluated the effect of double exposure of both marital cohesion and job strain (52). The study found that subjects with both high job strain and low cohesive marriage had a small but significant increase in ambulatory SBP during one year, while those with high job strain and a highly cohesive marriage had a small but significant reduction in SBP during 1 year (52). However, in subjects without job strain, BP decreased during the year both among the subjects with and without cohesive marriages (52).

Perceived stress

A study on 7066 men and women found that participants rating the highest level of perceived stress at baseline had a small but significantly increased risk of starting on anti-hypertensive treatment during the 10 years of follow-up (37).

Distress

A study on 466 men and women did not find an association between distress and incident hypertension defined as an office BP ≥130/85 after 6 years of follow-up (16).

Work stress

Seven studies evaluated job strain of which five did not divide their results by gender: one study included 11 777 men and 49 145 women and found no significant association between job strain and chronic hypertension, after 3.5 years of follow-up, when hypertension was based on health insurance examinations (office BP ≥190/95) (55). This null association was also found in a study on 209 men and women followed for 5 years, evaluating job strain as a risk factor for increased ambulatory SBP or DBP (56). Likewise, a study based on the Whitehall II cohort found no association between job strain group and change in ambulatory SBP or DBP, among 5630 men and 2456 women followed for 11 years (57). The study on double exposure from marital cohesion and job strain, however, found a significant association between job strain and change in 24-h ambulatory BP after 1 year of follow-up (52).

Two studies on job strain divided their results by gender and both found job strain to be associated with increased office BP among men but not among women (58, 59). In line with these results, a study including only men found those participants that experienced high job strain at baseline but had no job strain at follow-up to have a significant decrease in mean ambulatory BP at work and at home (60). However, those with no job strain at baseline but with job strain at the 3-years follow-up and those with the same job strain exposure at both time points, exhibited no significant changes in ambulatory BP (60)

Concerning other measures of WS, one study followed 3200 men and women for 8 years and found a significantly positive association between change in job demands but not decision latitude and incident hypertension (measured by office BP levels over 160/95 or start of using antihypertensive medication during follow-up) (61). Another study followed 2357 men and women for 20 years and found that worrying about keeping ones job was significantly associated to the development of hypertension (defined as start of using antihypertensive medication during follow-up) among men, but not among women (62). In another study, a low workplace social capital was found to be associated with chronic hypertension, based on health insurance examination, among 11 777 men but not among 49 145 women in a study with 3.5 years of follow-up (55). The same gender difference was found when evaluating low feeling of justice at work and incident hypertension measured by office BP or start on antihypertensive treatment among 4398 men and 1923 women followed for 18 years (18). The opposite gender difference was nevertheless found regarding low job satisfaction in a cohort of 2511 men and 443 women (33). Thus, the dissatisfied women were more in risk of increased office DBP after 4–7 years, whereas no influence of job satisfaction was found on office DBP among the included men (33). Also effort–reward imbalance has been found associated with increased risk of ambulatory BP ≥135/85 among women over 45 years old, while no association was found among younger women or among men of any age (63).

Conclusion

Marital stress and perceived stress might have an influence on BP, while an association with distress was not supported. Evaluating job strain, most studies not separating their results by gender did not support an association between job strain and increase in BP, whereas the studies taking gender into account supported job strain as a risk factor for increased BP among men but not among women. Measuring other areas of WS, most studies divided the results by gender and found that worrying about keeping ones job, low workplace social capital, and low feeling of justice seemed associated with increased BP among men, while dissatisfaction with one's job and effort–reward imbalance seemed more associated with increased BP among women. This indicates that different types of WS affect the BP differently between genders. An obstacle when comparing the studies evaluating BP was the differences in methods used for evaluating BP, e.g. office or ambulatory BP or start of using antihypertensive treatment. The ways used for evaluation are highlighted in Table 5.

Discussion

Based on this literature survey, and with the reported inclusion and exclusion criteria for evaluation, we find that the majority of the studies included support an association between chronic psychosocial stress and the development of MES. With respect to weight gain stress from relationships, generally perceived stress and distress are overall supported as risk factors while the studies on WS showed conflicting results. Too few studies evaluating the development of dyslipidemia were available to draw a conclusion; however, a trend toward a positive association was present. With respect to DM2, the prospective studies supported perceived stress and distress as risk factors among men, but not among women. Regarding WS and DM2, the results were ambiguous; however, there was a tendency of no association. With respect to hypertension, perceived stress but not distress seemed associated with increased BP. Regarding WS and development of hypertension, most studies found some association, mainly among men. Intriguingly the association between the different measures of WS (e.g. job strain and effort–reward imbalance) and development of hypertension differed between men and women.

To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review evaluating chronic stress as a risk factor for MES, which precluded comparisons with previous systematic reviews.

On the individual elements of MES, previous reviews and meta-analyses have been published: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies on stress as a risk factor for adiposity found overall stress to be associated with increasing adiposity (r=0.014, P<0.05) (64). However, when dividing the studies into groups of general stress and WS (job strain), neither stress groups alone showed significant associations with increasing adiposity. The meta-analyse focused more on exposure to external stressors rather than on the emotional state of stress and therefore included and excluded differently in relation to this review. Another review pooled data from 13 prospective cohort studies on the association between WS and weight gain (65). In line with the results of the Whitehall II study, they found a bidirectional association between job strain and obesity in the cross-sectional data; however, this was not tested in the longitudinal data (32, 65). In the longitudinal data, the study found that neither job strain at baseline nor continued job strain throughout follow-up was associated with obesity at follow-up, while development of job strain during follow-up was associated with becoming obese at follow-up (65). The results of these analyses have, however, been disputed due to methodological issues (66).

Regarding DM2 in line with this review, a review from the European Depression in Diabetes Research Consortium from 2010 found prospective epidemiological studies to support an association with general emotional stress while conflicting results were found regarding WS (67). Concerning DM2 and WS, a meta-analysis from 2012, including both cross-sectional and prospective observational epidemiological studies, supported the finding of a trend toward no association (68).

On the association between stress and the development of elevated BP, a systematic review of observational studies from 2009 included ten cohort studies and four case–control studies and found a trend for a positive association between chronic stress and elevated BP (69). Regarding job strain, another review found some association between job strain or job strain change and ambulatory BP change when including three longitudinal studies (70). Another recent review on psychosocial work factors and BP has included 40 cross-sectional, 12 prospective studies, and two case–control studies and found that approximately half of the studies supported a significant adverse effect of psychosocial work factors on BP(71). A more consistent adverse effect was observed among men as compared with women (71).

Theoretically, it is plausible that psychological stress induces MES. The pathway is probably multifactorial but could be explained either through stress-induced changes in the HPA axis or/and through stress-induced change in behavior. Considering hormonal changes a stress-induced hyperactivity of the HPA axis may explain the association between stress and all elements of MES: first, excess amounts of glucocorticoids enhance hepatic gluconeogenesis and inhibit the secretion and action of insulin leading to insulin resistance (72, 73). Second, glucocorticoids cause differentiation and proliferation of adipocytes and redistribution of fat, resulting in central adiposity, as it is seen in patients with Cushing's syndrome (74). Third, glucocorticoids decrease lipoprotein–lipase activity which lowers the level of HDL cholesterol and therefore skews the lipid-axes (75). Fourth, elevated levels of glucocorticoids are widely recognized to induce hypertension (76).

A change in behavior, due to chronic stress, may also be the pathway to MES. Kouvonen et al. (77) have found a dose dependency between WS (effort–reward imbalance) and the number of health risk behaviors (smoking, BMI >25, physically inactivity, and heavy drinking). People with perceived stress have been shown to spend less time on physical activity and change diet toward eating products richer in fat and sugar (78). Furthermore, stress reduces the probability of success with quitting smoking or reduce alcohol intake (37).

Human characteristics and coping mechanisms differ between individuals, causing them to react differently to stressors. The stress response therefore varies greatly among individuals and both acute and chronic stressors might be modulated with respect to personal factors. The impact of diversity in human characteristics should therefore not be underestimated when interpreting the results of this review. Several studies included finds differences between genders. This gender difference could be explained by women tending to choose other coping mechanisms than men when feeling stressed (79). Also women more often than men generally appraise everyday situations as stressful (79). Considering WS, an explanation for the gender difference could be that men and women have different occupational trajectories and have different effects of social support at work (71).

Overall, this review support that psychological stress is a causal factor for developing MES, while stress as a causal factor for the individual elements of MES shows more ambiguous results. This could indicate that MES as a defined syndrome combines the individual elements to a higher degree than just the sum of the individual elements. This argues for keeping MES as a clinical relevant phenotype even though the risk due to MES is no greater than the sum of the individual risk factors of the syndrome (80).

Strengths and limitations of the studies included

Most of the studies included had the qualities of following a large cohort over a long time. However, the studies included in this review had a varying quality. Most studies measured the stress exposure at baseline and the MES outcome at the end of follow-up though both the level of stress as well as the MES variables may have fluctuated during this period. Likewise, most studies adjusted for baseline status on physical activity, smoking, and alcohol consumption. However, this may also have changed over time as a response to changes in stress level. Overall, the included studies had a disparity in the adjustments for variables acting as covariates, confounders, or mediators, which could influence the results. Most studies included marital status, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors as physical activity. However, only one study included hours of sleep (38), though stress has been shown to be a strong predictor of sleep duration, and both short and long sleep durations are associated with elevated BMI (81). Likewise, only few studies adjusted for other exposures of stress when measuring WS and vice versa even though adjustment for the stress caused by stressors outside of the area in focus may have given a more adequate picture of the impact of the stress studied. To give an overview of the quality of the studies on this point, the variables included in the adjusted analyses are included in the Tables 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Strengths and limitations of this review

The strengths of this review are the overview of studies covering the area of chronic stress and both the MES as a syndrome as well as the individual components of the MES. To our knowledge this is the first review to give an overview of both MES as a syndrome and the elements of MES. The prospective design of the studies included provides the best basis for assessing causal relationships. Furthermore, the inclusion of studies measuring both stress in general terms, WS, and distress is strength of this review. We think, however, that it is an advantage that we in the results sections have separated the items to give a more nuanced picture of the area.

A limit specifically to this review is that the majority of studies were excluded since they were not prospective of nature, leaving only a small number of studies available for inclusion especially for dyslipidemia. Thus, one can argue that this form of systematic review is not generalizable, or that the literature is not ready for such a review. However, we believe that the 39 studies included represent sufficiently large populations for conclusions to be valid. Also many details harbored in the studies included are omitted. This was chosen for the purpose of magnitude of this review, and we believe enough details are included to cover the essential information.

The heterogeneity of the included studies concerning both exposure, outcome, control for confounding factors, and gender distribution presents a major limitation and is the reason why this is a narrative rather than a quantitatively systematic review. Also based on the variety in control for confounding factors, we decided to include the ‘must adjusted’ results, which may also represent a limit to the study.

The role of psychosocial stress as a risk factor for MES and the different elements of MES are still unsettled since overall the present evidence for an association is limited. In this context, it is essential to realise that measuring stress at baseline and reporting changes over many years is a fundamental problem, since the burden might fluctuate over time. However, since a consensus on MES being a risk factor for the development of ischemic heart disease, the current evidence level seems to be sufficient to recommend an increased focus on stress-reducing acts both in workplaces and in private life. Prospective studies with specific interventions in order to reduce chronic stress are warranted as is studies focusing on the mechanisms linking chronic psychosocial stress and incident MES. In future studies, a single measure of stress, if ever possible, and a single measure of MES should be preferred.

Declaration of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the review.

Funding

This review did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sector.

References

  • 1

    MottilloSFilionKBGenestJJosephLPiloteLPoirierPRinfretSSchiffrinELEisenbergMJ. The metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology20105611131132. (doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.034).

  • 2

    Bech P. In Clinical Psychometrics

  • 3

    HolmesMEEkkekakisPEisenmannJC. The physical activity, stress and metabolic syndrome triangle: a guide to unfamiliar territory for the obesity researcher. Obesity Reviews201011492507. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00680.x).

  • 4

    GoldsteinDSMcEwenB. Allostasis, homeostats, and the nature of stress. Stress200255558. (doi:10.1080/102538902900012345).

  • 5

    van-HollandBJFrings-DresenMHSluiterJK. Measuring short-term and long-term physiological stress effects by cortisol reactivity in saliva and hair. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health201285849852. (doi:10.1007/s00420-011-0727-3).

  • 6

    SchubertCLambertzMNelesenRABardwellWChoiJBDimsdaleJE. Effects of stress on heart rate complexity – a comparison between short-term and chronic stress. Biological Psychology200980325332. (doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.11.005).

  • 7

    RaikkonenKMatthewsKAKullerLH. Depressive symptoms and stressful life events predict metabolic syndrome among middle-aged women: a comparison of World Health Organization, Adult Treatment Panel III, and International Diabetes Foundation definitions. Diabetes Care200730872877. (doi:10.2337/dc06-1857).

  • 8

    CohenSKamarckTMermelsteinR. A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior198324385396. (doi:10.2307/2136404).

  • 9

    KarasekRBrissonCKawakamiNHoutmanIBongersPAmickB. The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology19983322355. (doi:10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.322).

  • 10

    SiegristJStarkeDChandolaTGodinIMarmotMNiedhammerIPeterR. The measurement of effort–reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Social Science & Medicine20045814831499. (doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00351-4).

  • 11

    LandsbergisPTheorellTSchwartzJGreinerBAKrauseN. Measurement of psychosocial workplace exposure variables. Occupational Medicine200015163188.

  • 12

    Goldberg D & Williams P. In A users's guide to the General Health Questionnaire

  • 13

    LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJMulrowCGotzschePCIoannidisJPAClarkeMDevereauxPJKleijnenJMoherD. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ2009339b2700. (doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700).

  • 14

    TroxelWMMatthewsKAGalloLCKullerLH. Marital quality and occurrence of the metabolic syndrome in women. Archives of Internal Medicine200516510221027. (doi:10.1001/archinte.165.9.1022).

  • 15

    WhismanMAUebelackerLA. A longitudinal investigation of marital adjustment as a risk factor for metabolic syndrome. Health Psychology2012318086. (doi:10.1037/a0025671).

  • 16

    PuustinenPJKoponenHKautiainenHMantyselkaPVanhalaM. Psychological distress predicts the development of the metabolic syndrome: a prospective population-based study. Psychosomatic Medicine201173158165. (doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3182037315).

  • 17

    ChandolaTBrunnerEMarmotM. Chronic stress at work and the metabolic syndrome: prospective study. BMJ2006332521525. (doi:10.1136/bmj.38693.435301.80).

  • 18

    GimenoDTabákAGFerrieJE ShipleyMJDe VogliRElovainio MMVahteraJMarmotMGKivimäkiM. Justice at work and metabolic syndrome: the Whitehall II study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine201067256262. (doi:10.1136/oem.2009.047324).

  • 19

    EdwardsEMStuverSOHeerenTCFredmanL. Job strain and incident metabolic syndrome over 5 years of follow-up: the coronary artery risk development in young adults study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine20125414471452. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182783f27).

  • 20

    KouvonenAStaffordMDe VogliR ShipleyMJMarmotMGCoxTVahteraJVäänänenAHeponiemiTSingh-ManouxA. Negative aspects of close relationships as a predictor of increased body mass index and waist circumference: the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Public Health201110114741480. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2010.300115).

  • 21

    BlockJPHeYZaslavskyAMDingLAyanianJZ. Psychosocial stress and change in weight among US adults. American Journal of Epidemiology2009170181192. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwp104).

  • 22

    Fowler-BrownAGBennettGGGoodmanMSWeeCCCorbie-SmithGMJamesSA. Psychosocial stress and 13-year BMI change among blacks: the Pitt County Study. Obesity20091721062109. (doi:10.1038/oby.2009.130).

  • 23

    GeraceTAGeorgeVA. Predictors of weight increases over 7 years in fire fighters and paramedics. Preventive Medicine199625593600. (doi:10.1006/pmed.1996.0094).

  • 24

    KorkeilaMKaprioJRissanenAKoshenvuoMSorensenTI. Predictors of major weight gain in adult Finns: stress, life satisfaction and personality traits. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders199822949957. (doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0800694).

  • 25

    MageeCACaputiPStefanicNIversonDC. Occupational factors associated with 4-year weight gain in Australian adults. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine201052977981. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181f26e72).

  • 26

    AllardKOThomsenJFMikkelsenSRuguliesRMorsOKaergaardAKolstadHAKaerlevLAndersenJHHansenAM. Effects of psychosocial work factors on lifestyle changes: a cohort study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine20115313641371. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182363bda).

  • 27

    BersetMSemmerNKElferingAJacobshagenNMeierLL. Does stress at work make you gain weight? A two-year longitudinal study. 2011374553. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.3089).

  • 28

    KivimakiMLeino-ArjasPLuukkonenRRiihimakiHVahteraJKirjonenJ. Work stress and risk of cardiovascular mortality: prospective cohort study of industrial employees. BMJ2002325857. (doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7369.857).

  • 29

    RoosELallukkaTRahkonenOLahelmaELaaksonenM. Working conditions and major weight gain–a prospective cohort study. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health201368166172. (doi:10.1080/19338244.2012.686931).

  • 30

    LallukkaTSarlio-LahteenkorvaSKaila-KangasLPitkaniemiJLuukkonenRLeino-ArjasP. Working conditions and weight gain: a 28-year follow-up study of industrial employees. European Journal of Epidemiology200823303310. (doi:10.1007/s10654-008-9233-7).

  • 31

    IshizakiMNakagawaHMorikawaYHondaRYamadaYKawakamiN. Influence of job strain on changes in body mass index and waist circumference–6-year longitudinal study. 200834288296. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.1267).

  • 32

    KivimakiMHeadJFerrieJEShipleyMJBrunnerEVahteraJMarmotMG. Work stress, weight gain and weight loss: evidence for bidirectional effects of job strain on body mass index in the Whitehall II study. International Journal of Obesity200630982987. (doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803229).

  • 33

    HeslopPSmithGDMetcalfeCMacleodJHartC. Change in job satisfaction, and its association with self-reported stress, cardiovascular risk factors and mortality. Social Science & Medicine20025415891599. (doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00138-1).

  • 34

    BrunnerEJChandolaTMarmotMG. Prospective effect of job strain on general and central obesity in the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Epidemiology2007165828837. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwk058).

  • 35

    GramQHChristensenUChristensenKBAustBBorgVBjornerJB. Psychosocial work environment factors and weight change: a prospective study among Danish health care workers. BMC Public Health20131343. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-43).

  • 36

    EekFOstergrenPO. Factors associated with BMI change over five years in a Swedish adult population. Results from the Scania Public Health Cohort Study. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health200937532544. (doi:10.1177/1403494809104359).

  • 37

    RodNHGronbaekMSchnohrPPrescottEKristensenTS. Perceived stress as a risk factor for changes in health behaviour and cardiac risk profile: a longitudinal study. Journal of Internal Medicine2009266467475. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2009.02124.x).

  • 38

    KatoMNodaMInoueMKadowakiTTsuganeS. Psychological factors, coffee and risk of diabetes mellitus among middle-aged Japanese: a population-based prospective study in the JPHC study cohort. Endocrine Journal200956459468. (doi:10.1507/endocrj.K09E-003).

  • 39

    ToshihiroMSaitoKTakikawaSTakebeNOnodaTSatohJ. Psychosocial factors are independent risk factors for the development of type 2 diabetes in Japanese workers with impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance,. Diabetic Medicine20082512111217. (doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02566.x).

  • 40

    NovakMBjorckLGiangKWHeden-StahlCWilhelmsenLRosengrenA. Perceived stress and incidence of type 2 diabetes: a 35-year follow-up study of middle-aged Swedish men. Diabetic Medicine201330e816. (doi:10.1111/dme.12037).

  • 41

    WilliamsEDMaglianoDJTappRJOldenburgBFShawJE. Psychosocial stress predicts abnormal glucose metabolism: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine2013466272. (doi:10.1007/s12160-013-9473-y).

  • 42

    ErikssonAKEkbomAGranathFHildingAEfendicSOstensonCG. Psychological distress and risk of pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes in a prospective study of Swedish middle-aged men and women. Diabetic Medicine200825834842. (doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02463.x).

  • 43

    MommersteegPMHerrRZijlstraWPSchneiderSPouwerF. Higher levels of psychological distress are associated with a higher risk of incident diabetes during 18 year follow-up: results from the British Household Panel Survey. BMC Public Health2012121109. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-1109).

  • 44

    ErikssonAKvan den DonkMHildingAOstensonCG. Work stress, sense of coherence, and risk of type 2 diabetes in a prospective study of middle-aged Swedish men and women. Diabetes Care20133626832689. (doi:10.2337/dc12-1738).

  • 45

    BrunnerEJKivimakiM. Epidemiology: work-related stress and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nature Reviews. Endocrinology20139449450. (doi:10.1038/nrendo.2013.124).

  • 46

    HeraclidesAMChandolaTWitteDRBrunnerEJ. Work stress, obesity and the risk of type 2 diabetes: gender-specific bidirectional effect in the Whitehall II study. Obesity201120 (428) 33. (doi:10.1038/oby.2011.95).

  • 47

    KawakamiNArakiSTakatsukaNShimizuHIshibashiH. Overtime, psychosocial working conditions, and occurrence of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in Japanese men. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health199953359363. (doi:10.1136/jech.53.6.359).

  • 48

    KroenkeCHSpiegelmanDMansonJSchernhammerESColditzGAKawachiI. Work characteristics and incidence of type 2 diabetes in women. American Journal of Epidemiology2007165175183. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwj355).

  • 49

    SmithPMGlazierRHLuHMustardCA. The psychosocial work environment and incident diabetes in Ontario, Canada. Occupational Medicine201262413419. (doi:10.1093/occmed/kqs128).

  • 50

    KumariMHeadJMarmotM. Prospective study of social and other risk factors for incidence of type 2 diabetes in the Whitehall II study. Archives of Internal Medicine200416418731880. (doi:10.1001/archinte.164.17.1873).

  • 51

    TokerSShiromAMelamedSArmonG. Work characteristics as predictors of diabetes incidence among apparently healthy employees. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology201217259267. (doi:10.1037/a0028401).

  • 52

    TobeSWKissASainsburySJesinMGeertsRBakerB. The impact of job strain and marital cohesion on ambulatory blood pressure during 1 year: the double exposure study. American Journal of Hypertension200720148153. (doi:10.1016/j.amjhyper.2006.07.011).

  • 53

    MyersMGHaynesRBRabkinSW. Canadian hypertension society guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. American Journal of Hypertension19991211491157. (doi:10.1016/S0895-7061(99)00199-5).

  • 54

    BakerBPaquetteMSzalaiJPDriverHPergerTHelmersKO'KellyBTobeS. The influence of marital adjustment on 3-year left ventricular mass and ambulatory blood pressure in mild hypertension. Archives of Internal Medicine200016034533458. (doi:10.1001/archinte.160.22.3453).

  • 55

    OksanenTKawachiIJokelaMKouvonenASuzukiETakaoSVirtanenMPenttiJVahteraJKivimäkiM. Workplace social capital and risk of chronic and severe hypertension: a cohort study. Journal of Hypertension20123011291136. (doi:10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835377ed).

  • 56

    FauvelJPM'PioIQuelinPRigaudJPLavilleMDucherM. Neither perceived job stress nor individual cardiovascular reactivity predict high blood pressure. Hypertension20034211121116. (doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000102862.93418.EE).

  • 57

    KivimakiMHeadJFerrieJEShipleyMJSteptoeAVahteraJMarmotMG. Hypertension is not the link between job strain and coronary heart disease in the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Hypertension20072011461153.

  • 58

    GuimontCBrissonCDagenaisGRMilotAVézinaMMasseBMoisanJLaflammeNBlanchetteC. Effects of job strain on blood pressure: a prospective study of male and female white-collar workers. American Journal of Public Health20069614361443. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.057679).

  • 59

    OhlinBBerglundGRosvallMNilssonPM. Job strain in men, but not in women, predicts a significant rise in blood pressure after 6.5 years of follow-up. Journal of Hypertension200725525531. (doi:10.1097/HJH.0b013e32801220fa).

  • 60

    SchnallPLSchwartzJELandsbergisPAWarrenKPickeringTG. A longitudinal study of job strain and ambulatory blood pressure: results from a three-year follow-up. Psychosomatic Medicine199860697706.

  • 61

    MarkovitzJHMatthewsKAWhooleyMLewisCEGreenlundKJ. Increases in job strain are associated with incident hypertension in the CARDIA Study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine20042849. (doi:10.1207/s15324796abm2801_2).

  • 62

    LevensteinSSmithMWKaplanGA. Psychosocial predictors of hypertension in men and women. Archives of Internal Medicine200116113411346. (doi:10.1001/archinte.161.10.1341).

  • 63

    Gilbert-OuimetMBrissonCVezinaMMilotABlanchetteC. Repeated exposure to effort–reward imbalance, increased blood pressure, and hypertension incidence among white-collar workers: effort–reward imbalance and blood pressure. Journal of Psychosomatic Research2012722632. (doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2011.07.002).

  • 64

    WardleJChidaYGibsonELWhitakerKLSteptoeA. Stress and adiposity: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Obesity201119771778. (doi:10.1038/oby.2010.241).

  • 65

    NybergSTHeikkilaKFranssonEIAlfredssonLDe BacquerDBjornerJBBonenfantSBorritzMBurrHCasiniA. Job strain in relation to body mass index: pooled analysis of 160 000 adults from 13 cohort studies. Journal of Internal Medicine20122726573. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02482.x).

  • 66

    ChoiBDobsonMLandsbergisPKoSYangHSchnallPBakerD. Job strain and obesity. Journal of Internal Medicine2014275438440. (doi:10.1111/joim.12173).

  • 67

    PouwerFKupperNAdriaanseMC. Does emotional stress cause type 2 diabetes mellitus? A review from the European Depression in Diabetes (EDID) Research Consortium. Discovery Medicine20109112118.

  • 68

    CosgroveMPSargeantLACaleyachettyRGriffinSJ. Work-related stress and type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Occupational Medicine20126216773. (doi:10.1093/occmed/kqs002).

  • 69

    SparrenbergerFCicheleroFTAscoliAMFonsecaFPWeissGBerwangerOFuchsSCMoreiraLBFuchsFD. Does psychosocial stress cause hypertension? A systematic review of observational studies. Journal of Human Hypertension2009231219. (doi:10.1038/jhh.2008.74).

  • 70

    LandsbergisPADobsonMKoutsourasGSchnallP. Job strain and ambulatory blood pressure: a meta-analysis and systematic review. American Journal of Public Health2013103e61e71. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.301153).

  • 71

    Gilbert-OuimetMTrudelXBrissonCMilotAVezinaM. Adverse effects of psychosocial work factors on blood pressure: systematic review of studies on demand-control-support and effort–reward imbalance models. 201440109132. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.3390).

  • 72

    BjorntorpP. Neuroendocrine perturbations as a cause of insulin resistance. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews199915427441. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-7560(199911/12)15:6<427::AID-DMRR68>3.0.CO;2-C).

  • 73

    Rosmond R. Role of stress in the pathogenesis of the metabolic syndrome. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2005 30 1–10

  • 74

    MacfarlaneDPForbesSWalkerBR. Glucocorticoids and fatty acid metabolism in humans: fuelling fat redistribution in the metabolic syndrome. Journal of Endocrinology2008197189204. (doi:10.1677/JOE-08-0054).

  • 75

    NiauraRStoneyCMHerbertPN. Lipids in psychological research: the last decade. Biological Psychology199234143. (doi:10.1016/0301-0511(92)90022-M).

  • 76

    GoodwinJEGellerDS. Glucocorticoid-induced hypertension. Pediatric Nephrology201127105966. (doi:10.1007/s00467-011-1928-4).

  • 77

    KouvonenAKivimakiMVirtanenMHeponiemiTElovainioMPenttiJLinnaAVahteraJ. Effort–reward imbalance at work and the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors: cross-sectional survey in a sample of 36,127 public sector employees. BMC Public Health2006624. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-24).

  • 78

    ZellnerDALoaizaSGonzalezZPitaJMoralesJPecoraDWolfA. Food selection changes under stress. Physiology & Behaviour200687789793. (doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.01.014).

  • 79

    Pilar MatudM. Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and Individual Differences20043714011415. (doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.010).

  • 80

    MenteAYusufSIslamSMcQueenMJTanomsupSOnenCLRangarajanSGersteinHCAnandSSINTERHEART Investigators. Metabolic syndrome and risk of acute myocardial infarction a case–control study of 26,903 subjects from 52 countries. Journal of the American College of Cardiology20105523902398. (doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.053).

  • 81

    DweckJSJenkinsSMNolanLJ. The role of emotional eating and stress in the influence of short sleep on food consumption. Appetite201372106113. (doi:10.1016/j.appet.2013.10.001).

 

An official journal of

European Society of Endocrinology Society for Endocrinology

Sections

Figures

References

1

MottilloSFilionKBGenestJJosephLPiloteLPoirierPRinfretSSchiffrinELEisenbergMJ. The metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology20105611131132. (doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.034).

2

Bech P. In Clinical Psychometrics

3

HolmesMEEkkekakisPEisenmannJC. The physical activity, stress and metabolic syndrome triangle: a guide to unfamiliar territory for the obesity researcher. Obesity Reviews201011492507. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00680.x).

4

GoldsteinDSMcEwenB. Allostasis, homeostats, and the nature of stress. Stress200255558. (doi:10.1080/102538902900012345).

5

van-HollandBJFrings-DresenMHSluiterJK. Measuring short-term and long-term physiological stress effects by cortisol reactivity in saliva and hair. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health201285849852. (doi:10.1007/s00420-011-0727-3).

6

SchubertCLambertzMNelesenRABardwellWChoiJBDimsdaleJE. Effects of stress on heart rate complexity – a comparison between short-term and chronic stress. Biological Psychology200980325332. (doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.11.005).

7

RaikkonenKMatthewsKAKullerLH. Depressive symptoms and stressful life events predict metabolic syndrome among middle-aged women: a comparison of World Health Organization, Adult Treatment Panel III, and International Diabetes Foundation definitions. Diabetes Care200730872877. (doi:10.2337/dc06-1857).

8

CohenSKamarckTMermelsteinR. A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior198324385396. (doi:10.2307/2136404).

9

KarasekRBrissonCKawakamiNHoutmanIBongersPAmickB. The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology19983322355. (doi:10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.322).

10

SiegristJStarkeDChandolaTGodinIMarmotMNiedhammerIPeterR. The measurement of effort–reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Social Science & Medicine20045814831499. (doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00351-4).

11

LandsbergisPTheorellTSchwartzJGreinerBAKrauseN. Measurement of psychosocial workplace exposure variables. Occupational Medicine200015163188.

12

Goldberg D & Williams P. In A users's guide to the General Health Questionnaire

13

LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJMulrowCGotzschePCIoannidisJPAClarkeMDevereauxPJKleijnenJMoherD. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ2009339b2700. (doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700).

14

TroxelWMMatthewsKAGalloLCKullerLH. Marital quality and occurrence of the metabolic syndrome in women. Archives of Internal Medicine200516510221027. (doi:10.1001/archinte.165.9.1022).

15

WhismanMAUebelackerLA. A longitudinal investigation of marital adjustment as a risk factor for metabolic syndrome. Health Psychology2012318086. (doi:10.1037/a0025671).

16

PuustinenPJKoponenHKautiainenHMantyselkaPVanhalaM. Psychological distress predicts the development of the metabolic syndrome: a prospective population-based study. Psychosomatic Medicine201173158165. (doi:10.1097/PSY.0b013e3182037315).

17

ChandolaTBrunnerEMarmotM. Chronic stress at work and the metabolic syndrome: prospective study. BMJ2006332521525. (doi:10.1136/bmj.38693.435301.80).

18

GimenoDTabákAGFerrieJE ShipleyMJDe VogliRElovainio MMVahteraJMarmotMGKivimäkiM. Justice at work and metabolic syndrome: the Whitehall II study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine201067256262. (doi:10.1136/oem.2009.047324).

19

EdwardsEMStuverSOHeerenTCFredmanL. Job strain and incident metabolic syndrome over 5 years of follow-up: the coronary artery risk development in young adults study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine20125414471452. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182783f27).

20

KouvonenAStaffordMDe VogliR ShipleyMJMarmotMGCoxTVahteraJVäänänenAHeponiemiTSingh-ManouxA. Negative aspects of close relationships as a predictor of increased body mass index and waist circumference: the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Public Health201110114741480. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2010.300115).

21

BlockJPHeYZaslavskyAMDingLAyanianJZ. Psychosocial stress and change in weight among US adults. American Journal of Epidemiology2009170181192. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwp104).

22

Fowler-BrownAGBennettGGGoodmanMSWeeCCCorbie-SmithGMJamesSA. Psychosocial stress and 13-year BMI change among blacks: the Pitt County Study. Obesity20091721062109. (doi:10.1038/oby.2009.130).

23

GeraceTAGeorgeVA. Predictors of weight increases over 7 years in fire fighters and paramedics. Preventive Medicine199625593600. (doi:10.1006/pmed.1996.0094).

24

KorkeilaMKaprioJRissanenAKoshenvuoMSorensenTI. Predictors of major weight gain in adult Finns: stress, life satisfaction and personality traits. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders199822949957. (doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0800694).

25

MageeCACaputiPStefanicNIversonDC. Occupational factors associated with 4-year weight gain in Australian adults. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine201052977981. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181f26e72).

26

AllardKOThomsenJFMikkelsenSRuguliesRMorsOKaergaardAKolstadHAKaerlevLAndersenJHHansenAM. Effects of psychosocial work factors on lifestyle changes: a cohort study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine20115313641371. (doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182363bda).

27

BersetMSemmerNKElferingAJacobshagenNMeierLL. Does stress at work make you gain weight? A two-year longitudinal study. 2011374553. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.3089).

28

KivimakiMLeino-ArjasPLuukkonenRRiihimakiHVahteraJKirjonenJ. Work stress and risk of cardiovascular mortality: prospective cohort study of industrial employees. BMJ2002325857. (doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7369.857).

29

RoosELallukkaTRahkonenOLahelmaELaaksonenM. Working conditions and major weight gain–a prospective cohort study. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health201368166172. (doi:10.1080/19338244.2012.686931).

30

LallukkaTSarlio-LahteenkorvaSKaila-KangasLPitkaniemiJLuukkonenRLeino-ArjasP. Working conditions and weight gain: a 28-year follow-up study of industrial employees. European Journal of Epidemiology200823303310. (doi:10.1007/s10654-008-9233-7).

31

IshizakiMNakagawaHMorikawaYHondaRYamadaYKawakamiN. Influence of job strain on changes in body mass index and waist circumference–6-year longitudinal study. 200834288296. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.1267).

32

KivimakiMHeadJFerrieJEShipleyMJBrunnerEVahteraJMarmotMG. Work stress, weight gain and weight loss: evidence for bidirectional effects of job strain on body mass index in the Whitehall II study. International Journal of Obesity200630982987. (doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803229).

33

HeslopPSmithGDMetcalfeCMacleodJHartC. Change in job satisfaction, and its association with self-reported stress, cardiovascular risk factors and mortality. Social Science & Medicine20025415891599. (doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00138-1).

34

BrunnerEJChandolaTMarmotMG. Prospective effect of job strain on general and central obesity in the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Epidemiology2007165828837. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwk058).

35

GramQHChristensenUChristensenKBAustBBorgVBjornerJB. Psychosocial work environment factors and weight change: a prospective study among Danish health care workers. BMC Public Health20131343. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-43).

36

EekFOstergrenPO. Factors associated with BMI change over five years in a Swedish adult population. Results from the Scania Public Health Cohort Study. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health200937532544. (doi:10.1177/1403494809104359).

37

RodNHGronbaekMSchnohrPPrescottEKristensenTS. Perceived stress as a risk factor for changes in health behaviour and cardiac risk profile: a longitudinal study. Journal of Internal Medicine2009266467475. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2009.02124.x).

38

KatoMNodaMInoueMKadowakiTTsuganeS. Psychological factors, coffee and risk of diabetes mellitus among middle-aged Japanese: a population-based prospective study in the JPHC study cohort. Endocrine Journal200956459468. (doi:10.1507/endocrj.K09E-003).

39

ToshihiroMSaitoKTakikawaSTakebeNOnodaTSatohJ. Psychosocial factors are independent risk factors for the development of type 2 diabetes in Japanese workers with impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance,. Diabetic Medicine20082512111217. (doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02566.x).

40

NovakMBjorckLGiangKWHeden-StahlCWilhelmsenLRosengrenA. Perceived stress and incidence of type 2 diabetes: a 35-year follow-up study of middle-aged Swedish men. Diabetic Medicine201330e816. (doi:10.1111/dme.12037).

41

WilliamsEDMaglianoDJTappRJOldenburgBFShawJE. Psychosocial stress predicts abnormal glucose metabolism: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine2013466272. (doi:10.1007/s12160-013-9473-y).

42

ErikssonAKEkbomAGranathFHildingAEfendicSOstensonCG. Psychological distress and risk of pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes in a prospective study of Swedish middle-aged men and women. Diabetic Medicine200825834842. (doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2008.02463.x).

43

MommersteegPMHerrRZijlstraWPSchneiderSPouwerF. Higher levels of psychological distress are associated with a higher risk of incident diabetes during 18 year follow-up: results from the British Household Panel Survey. BMC Public Health2012121109. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-1109).

44

ErikssonAKvan den DonkMHildingAOstensonCG. Work stress, sense of coherence, and risk of type 2 diabetes in a prospective study of middle-aged Swedish men and women. Diabetes Care20133626832689. (doi:10.2337/dc12-1738).

45

BrunnerEJKivimakiM. Epidemiology: work-related stress and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nature Reviews. Endocrinology20139449450. (doi:10.1038/nrendo.2013.124).

46

HeraclidesAMChandolaTWitteDRBrunnerEJ. Work stress, obesity and the risk of type 2 diabetes: gender-specific bidirectional effect in the Whitehall II study. Obesity201120 (428) 33. (doi:10.1038/oby.2011.95).

47

KawakamiNArakiSTakatsukaNShimizuHIshibashiH. Overtime, psychosocial working conditions, and occurrence of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in Japanese men. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health199953359363. (doi:10.1136/jech.53.6.359).

48

KroenkeCHSpiegelmanDMansonJSchernhammerESColditzGAKawachiI. Work characteristics and incidence of type 2 diabetes in women. American Journal of Epidemiology2007165175183. (doi:10.1093/aje/kwj355).

49

SmithPMGlazierRHLuHMustardCA. The psychosocial work environment and incident diabetes in Ontario, Canada. Occupational Medicine201262413419. (doi:10.1093/occmed/kqs128).

50

KumariMHeadJMarmotM. Prospective study of social and other risk factors for incidence of type 2 diabetes in the Whitehall II study. Archives of Internal Medicine200416418731880. (doi:10.1001/archinte.164.17.1873).

51

TokerSShiromAMelamedSArmonG. Work characteristics as predictors of diabetes incidence among apparently healthy employees. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology201217259267. (doi:10.1037/a0028401).

52

TobeSWKissASainsburySJesinMGeertsRBakerB. The impact of job strain and marital cohesion on ambulatory blood pressure during 1 year: the double exposure study. American Journal of Hypertension200720148153. (doi:10.1016/j.amjhyper.2006.07.011).

53

MyersMGHaynesRBRabkinSW. Canadian hypertension society guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. American Journal of Hypertension19991211491157. (doi:10.1016/S0895-7061(99)00199-5).

54

BakerBPaquetteMSzalaiJPDriverHPergerTHelmersKO'KellyBTobeS. The influence of marital adjustment on 3-year left ventricular mass and ambulatory blood pressure in mild hypertension. Archives of Internal Medicine200016034533458. (doi:10.1001/archinte.160.22.3453).

55

OksanenTKawachiIJokelaMKouvonenASuzukiETakaoSVirtanenMPenttiJVahteraJKivimäkiM. Workplace social capital and risk of chronic and severe hypertension: a cohort study. Journal of Hypertension20123011291136. (doi:10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835377ed).

56

FauvelJPM'PioIQuelinPRigaudJPLavilleMDucherM. Neither perceived job stress nor individual cardiovascular reactivity predict high blood pressure. Hypertension20034211121116. (doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000102862.93418.EE).

57

KivimakiMHeadJFerrieJEShipleyMJSteptoeAVahteraJMarmotMG. Hypertension is not the link between job strain and coronary heart disease in the Whitehall II study. American Journal of Hypertension20072011461153.

58

GuimontCBrissonCDagenaisGRMilotAVézinaMMasseBMoisanJLaflammeNBlanchetteC. Effects of job strain on blood pressure: a prospective study of male and female white-collar workers. American Journal of Public Health20069614361443. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.057679).

59

OhlinBBerglundGRosvallMNilssonPM. Job strain in men, but not in women, predicts a significant rise in blood pressure after 6.5 years of follow-up. Journal of Hypertension200725525531. (doi:10.1097/HJH.0b013e32801220fa).

60

SchnallPLSchwartzJELandsbergisPAWarrenKPickeringTG. A longitudinal study of job strain and ambulatory blood pressure: results from a three-year follow-up. Psychosomatic Medicine199860697706.

61

MarkovitzJHMatthewsKAWhooleyMLewisCEGreenlundKJ. Increases in job strain are associated with incident hypertension in the CARDIA Study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine20042849. (doi:10.1207/s15324796abm2801_2).

62

LevensteinSSmithMWKaplanGA. Psychosocial predictors of hypertension in men and women. Archives of Internal Medicine200116113411346. (doi:10.1001/archinte.161.10.1341).

63

Gilbert-OuimetMBrissonCVezinaMMilotABlanchetteC. Repeated exposure to effort–reward imbalance, increased blood pressure, and hypertension incidence among white-collar workers: effort–reward imbalance and blood pressure. Journal of Psychosomatic Research2012722632. (doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2011.07.002).

64

WardleJChidaYGibsonELWhitakerKLSteptoeA. Stress and adiposity: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Obesity201119771778. (doi:10.1038/oby.2010.241).

65

NybergSTHeikkilaKFranssonEIAlfredssonLDe BacquerDBjornerJBBonenfantSBorritzMBurrHCasiniA. Job strain in relation to body mass index: pooled analysis of 160 000 adults from 13 cohort studies. Journal of Internal Medicine20122726573. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02482.x).

66

ChoiBDobsonMLandsbergisPKoSYangHSchnallPBakerD. Job strain and obesity. Journal of Internal Medicine2014275438440. (doi:10.1111/joim.12173).

67

PouwerFKupperNAdriaanseMC. Does emotional stress cause type 2 diabetes mellitus? A review from the European Depression in Diabetes (EDID) Research Consortium. Discovery Medicine20109112118.

68

CosgroveMPSargeantLACaleyachettyRGriffinSJ. Work-related stress and type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Occupational Medicine20126216773. (doi:10.1093/occmed/kqs002).

69

SparrenbergerFCicheleroFTAscoliAMFonsecaFPWeissGBerwangerOFuchsSCMoreiraLBFuchsFD. Does psychosocial stress cause hypertension? A systematic review of observational studies. Journal of Human Hypertension2009231219. (doi:10.1038/jhh.2008.74).

70

LandsbergisPADobsonMKoutsourasGSchnallP. Job strain and ambulatory blood pressure: a meta-analysis and systematic review. American Journal of Public Health2013103e61e71. (doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.301153).

71

Gilbert-OuimetMTrudelXBrissonCMilotAVezinaM. Adverse effects of psychosocial work factors on blood pressure: systematic review of studies on demand-control-support and effort–reward imbalance models. 201440109132. (doi:10.5271/sjweh.3390).

72

BjorntorpP. Neuroendocrine perturbations as a cause of insulin resistance. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews199915427441. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-7560(199911/12)15:6<427::AID-DMRR68>3.0.CO;2-C).

73

Rosmond R. Role of stress in the pathogenesis of the metabolic syndrome. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2005 30 1–10

74

MacfarlaneDPForbesSWalkerBR. Glucocorticoids and fatty acid metabolism in humans: fuelling fat redistribution in the metabolic syndrome. Journal of Endocrinology2008197189204. (doi:10.1677/JOE-08-0054).

75

NiauraRStoneyCMHerbertPN. Lipids in psychological research: the last decade. Biological Psychology199234143. (doi:10.1016/0301-0511(92)90022-M).

76

GoodwinJEGellerDS. Glucocorticoid-induced hypertension. Pediatric Nephrology201127105966. (doi:10.1007/s00467-011-1928-4).

77

KouvonenAKivimakiMVirtanenMHeponiemiTElovainioMPenttiJLinnaAVahteraJ. Effort–reward imbalance at work and the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors: cross-sectional survey in a sample of 36,127 public sector employees. BMC Public Health2006624. (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-24).

78

ZellnerDALoaizaSGonzalezZPitaJMoralesJPecoraDWolfA. Food selection changes under stress. Physiology & Behaviour200687789793. (doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.01.014).

79

Pilar MatudM. Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and Individual Differences20043714011415. (doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.010).

80

MenteAYusufSIslamSMcQueenMJTanomsupSOnenCLRangarajanSGersteinHCAnandSSINTERHEART Investigators. Metabolic syndrome and risk of acute myocardial infarction a case–control study of 26,903 subjects from 52 countries. Journal of the American College of Cardiology20105523902398. (doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.053).

81

DweckJSJenkinsSMNolanLJ. The role of emotional eating and stress in the influence of short sleep on food consumption. Appetite201372106113. (doi:10.1016/j.appet.2013.10.001).

Index Card

Cited By

PubMed

Google Scholar

Related Articles

Altmetrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 804 804 191
PDF Downloads 114 114 23