Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22105670›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2012

Supporting return-to-work in the face of legislation: stakeholders' experiences with return-to-work after breast cancer in Belgium.

Corine Tiedtke, Peter Donceel, Lieve Knops, Huget Désiron, Bernadette Dierckx de Casterlé, Angelique de Rijk

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The experiences and perceptions of employers on cancer survivors returning to work: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Corine TiedtkeDepartment of Occupational, Environmental and Insurance Medicine, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35/5, 3000 Louvain, Belgium. corine.tiedtke@med.kuleuven.be
Peter Donceel
Lieve Knops
Huget Désiron
Bernadette Dierckx de Casterlé
Angelique de Rijk
KU Leuven · BEMaastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnosis of breast cancer increasingly implies a return-to-work (RTW) challenge as survival rates increase. RTW is regarded as a multidisciplinary process and a country's legislation affects the degree of involvement of the different stakeholders. We elucidated on bottlenecks and contributing factors and the relationship between policy and practice regarding RTW of employees with breast cancer as perceived by Belgian (Flemish) stakeholders.

methodsThree multidisciplinary groups (n = 7, n = 9, n = 10) were interviewed during a breast cancer conference. Treating physicians (n = 4), employers (n = 6), social security physicians (n = 3), occupational physicians (n = 4), survivors (n = 5) and representatives of patient associations (n = 4) were included. The major theme was the legal and practical role in the RTW process as experienced by the participants. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed to analyse stakeholders' experiences of women's RTW after breast cancer.

resultsThe stakeholders reported different perspectives. Employees focus on treatment and feel ill-informed about the RTW options. Treating physicians do not feel competent about advising on work-related questions. Employers have to balance the interests of both the business and the employee. Social security physicians assess ability to work and facilitate RTW options. Occupational physicians see opportunities but the legislation does not support their involvement. Stakeholders expressed the need for coordination and reported finding ways to accommodate the employee's needs by being flexible with the legislation to support the RTW process.

conclusionsTwo factors might hamper RTW for breast cancer patients: the varying stakeholder perspectives and Belgian legislation which emphasizes the patient or disability role, but not the employee role. When stakeholders are motivated they find ways to support RTW, but improved legislation could support the necessary coordination of RTW for these patients.

Indexed as

EmploymentRehabilitation, VocationalAdultBelgiumBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PolicyHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMotivationOccupational Health ServicesQualitative ResearchSick LeaveSurvivors

Identifiers

PMID22105670
OpenAlexW2000171739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.