Abstract

This study aims to assess the accuracy of temporary employment as indicator or proxy measure of precarious employment. Using sensitivity and specificity analysis, we compared type of contract (temporary versus permanent) with the Chilean version of the multidimensional Employment Precariousness Scale. Temporary employment exhibited very low sensitivity (<30%) (specificity >90%), resulting in roughly 38% of false negative results. Different EPRES-Ch cut-off scores produced similar results. The main implication of these findings is that the public health relevance of precarious employment is being underestimated both in terms of prevalence and of its association with health, making it critical that valid multidimensional measures of precarious employment be implemented.