Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23947538›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2013

Design of the Bottom-up Innovation project--a participatory, primary preventive, organizational level intervention on work-related stress and well-being for workers in Dutch vocational education.

Roosmarijn M C Schelvis, Karen M Oude Hengel, Noortje M Wiezer, Birgitte M Blatter, Joost A G M van Genabeek, Ernst T Bohlmeijer, Allard J van der Beek

Open access · goldAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Medical Surveillance, Continuous Health Promotion and a Participatory Intervention in a Small Company.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Roosmarijn M C SchelvisNetherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research TNO, P.O. Box 718, 2130 AS Hoofddorp, The Netherlands. roos.schelvis@tno.nl
Karen M Oude Hengel
Noortje M Wiezer
Birgitte M Blatter
Joost A G M van Genabeek
Ernst T Bohlmeijer
Allard J van der Beek
Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research · NLAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLEMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLUniversity of Twente · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the educational sector job demands have intensified, while job resources remained the same. A prolonged disbalance between demands and resources contributes to lowered vitality and heightened need for recovery, eventually resulting in burnout, sickness absence and retention problems. Until now stress management interventions in education focused mostly on strengthening the individual capacity to cope with stress, instead of altering the sources of stress at work at the organizational level. These interventions have been only partly effective in influencing burnout and well-being. Therefore, the "Bottom-up Innovation" project tests a two-phased participatory, primary preventive organizational level intervention (i.e. a participatory action approach) that targets and engages all workers in the primary process of schools. It is hypothesized that participating in the project results in increased occupational self-efficacy and organizational efficacy. The central research question: is an organization focused stress management intervention based on participatory action effective in reducing the need for recovery and enhancing vitality in school employees in comparison to business as usual? METHODS/

designThe study is designed as a controlled trial with mixed methods and three measurement moments: baseline (quantitative measures), six months and 18 months (quantitative and qualitative measures). At first follow-up short term effects of taking part in the needs assessment (phase 1) will be determined. At second follow-up the long term effects of taking part in the needs assessment will be determined as well as the effects of implemented tailored workplace solutions (phase 2). A process evaluation based on quantitative and qualitative data will shed light on whether, how and why the intervention (does not) work(s). DISCUSSION: "Bottom-up Innovation" is a combined effort of the educational sector, intervention providers and researchers. Results will provide insight into (1) the relation between participating in the intervention and occupational and organizational self-efficacy, (2) how an improved balance between job demands and job resources might affect need for recovery and vitality, in the short and long term, from an organizational perspective, and (3) success and fail factors for implementation of an organizational intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register NTR3284.

Indexed as

EmploymentFollow-Up StudiesHumansNetherlandsOccupational Health ServicesOrganizational InnovationPrimary PreventionProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchResearch DesignStress, PsychologicalVocational Education

Identifiers

PMID23947538
PMCPMC3751794
OpenAlexW2142860929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.