Key result
New methods for workplace stress assessment were surveyed and compared to traditional methods across nine characteristics to facilitate stakeholder decision-making.
This review provides a comparative analysis of new versus traditional stress assessment methods in the workplace to guide organizational decision-making.
May guide workplace stress tool selection; leaves open whether novel methods improve outcomes over traditional ones.
The topic of stress is nowadays a very important one, not only in research but on social life in general. People are increasingly aware of this problem and its consequences at several levels: health, social life, work, quality of life, etc. This resulted in a significant increase in the search for devices and applications to measure and manage stress in real-time. Recent technological and scientific evolution fosters this interest with the development of new methods and approaches. In this paper we survey these new methods for stress assessment, focusing especially on those that are suited for the workplace: one of today's major sources of stress. We contrast them with more traditional methods and compare them between themselves, evaluating nine characteristics. Given the diversity of methods that exist nowadays, this work facilitates the stakeholders' decision towards which one to use, based on how much their organization values aspects such as privacy, accuracy, cost-effectiveness or intrusiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carneiro et al. (2017) conducted a review in Workplace stress. New methods for stress assessment and monitoring vs. Traditional methods was evaluated. New methods for workplace stress assessment were surveyed and compared to traditional methods across nine characteristics to facilitate stakeholder decision-making.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: