Alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use are associated with job loss at follow-up: Findings from the CONSTANCES cohort

Guillaume Airagnes, Cédric Lemogne, Pierre Meneton, Marie Plessz, Marcel Goldberg, Nicolas Hoertel, Yves Roquelaure, Frédéric Limosin and Marie Zins

PLOS ONE, 2019, vol. 14, issue 9, 1-16

Abstract: Background: Substance use is more prevalent among unemployed subjects compared to employed ones. However, quantifying the risk subsequent of job loss at short-term according to substance use remains underexplored as well as examining if this association persist across various sociodemographic and occupational positions previously linked to job loss. We examined this issue prospectively for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis use and their combination, among a large population-based sample of men and women, while taking into account age, gender, overall health status and depressive symptoms. Methods: From the French population-based CONSTANCES cohort, 18,879 working participants were included between 2012 and 2016. At baseline, alcohol use disorder risk according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (mild, dangerous, problematic or dependence), tobacco (non-smoker, former smoker, 1–9, 10–19, >19 cigarettes/day) and cannabis use (never, not in past year, less than once a month, once a month or more) were assessed. Employment status at one-year (working versus not working) was the dependent variable. Logistic regressions provided Odds Ratios(OR(95%CI)) of job loss at one-year, adjusting for age, gender, self-reported health and depressive state (measured with the Center of Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale). Stratified analyses were performed for education, occupational grade, household income, job stress (measured with the Effort-Reward Imbalance), type of job contract, type of work time and history of unemployment. In sensitivity analyses, employment status over a three-year follow-up was used as dependent variable. Results: Alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use were associated with job loss, from the second to the highest category: 1.46(95%CI:1.23–1.73) to 1.92(95%CI:1.34–2.75), 1.26(95%CI:1.09–1.46) to 1.78(95%CI:1.26–2.54) and 1.45(95%CI:1.27–1.66) to 2.68(95%CI:2.10–3.42), respectively, and with dose-dependent relationships (all p for trend

Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222361 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 22361&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0222361

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222361

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().