Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24065344›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2014

Injured workers' assessment of vocational rehabilitation services before and after retraining.

Jeanne M Sears, Thomas M Wickizer, Beryl A Schulman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Jeanne M SearsDepartment of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Box 354809, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA, jeannes@u.washington.edu.
Thomas M Wickizer
Beryl A Schulman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWorkers' compensation-based vocational rehabilitation (VR) programs are costly and challenging to operate effectively. This study aimed to: (1) describe injured workers' assessment of Washington State's VR system before and after vocational retraining, (2) describe the factors affecting injured worker satisfaction with VR services, and (3) gather suggestions for program improvement from injured workers.

methodsTelephone surveys were conducted in two distinct samples: (1) 361 workers were interviewed after determination of retraining eligibility but before retraining plan development, and (2) 360 workers were interviewed after cessation of vocational services and claim closure.

resultsInjured workers interviewed before retraining were more often satisfied with the VR system (69 %) than were those interviewed after VR services ended (46 %). Although 55 % were initially somewhat/very certain they would return to work (RTW) after retraining, only 21 % had RTW 3-6 months after claim closure. Poor health, poor functional ability, and multiple retraining attempts were significantly associated with dissatisfaction. Suggestions for program improvement fell most frequently into the following areas: (1) more training choices, more worker input into the retraining goal, and/or a better fit of the retraining goal with the workers' experience and abilities (25 %); (2) listen to, respect, and/or understand the worker with regard to their interests, goals, and limitations (17 %); and (3) more support with job placement, work re-entry skills, and RTW in general (9 %).

conclusionsThere is substantial room for improvement in worker satisfaction with VR. Injured workers' feedback may facilitate identification of opportunities to improve the VR process and RTW outcomes.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorRehabilitation, VocationalReturn to WorkWorkers' CompensationFemaleHealth StatusHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedOccupational InjuriesProgram EvaluationWashington

Identifiers

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.