Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26935051›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Factors associated with (non-)participation of cancer survivors with job loss in a supportive return to work program.

Martine P van Egmond, Johannes R Anema, Amika Singh, Allard J van der Beek, Saskia F A Duijts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Predictors of post-cancer diagnosis resignation among Japanese cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2020
    Article
  4. Factors influencing return to work of cancer survivors: a population-based study in Italy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Martine P van EgmondDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, C581, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes R AnemaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, C581, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.anema@vumc.nl.
Amika SinghDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, C581, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Allard J van der BeekDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, C581, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Saskia F A DuijtsDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, C581, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate and implement supportive programs, it is important to understand which cancer survivors (CSs) are participating in these programs and which motives exist for declining participation. Recently, a supportive return-to-work (RTW) program was offered to CSs with job loss. The purpose of this study was to identify factors and motives associated with (non-)participation of CSs with job loss in the RTW program.

methodsIn this cross-sectional study (N = 286), information on socio-demographic, health-related, psychosocial, and work-related characteristics of CSs in the program was collected. Similar data were collected from those who declined participation. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted (p < 0.05) to identify factors associated with (non-)participation. Motives for declining participation were identified using descriptive analysis.

resultsBeing married (odds ratio (OR) 0.23; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.69) or living together (OR 0.25; 95 % CI 0.07-0.96) decreased the likelihood of participation in the RTW program. Having a temporary employment contract prior to unemployment (OR 2.60; 95 % CI 1.20-5.63), a clear intention to RTW (OR 2.65; 95 % CI 1.20-5.82), and higher scores on a readiness to RTW instrument, i.e., contemplation scale (OR 2.00; 95 % CI 1.65-2.40) and prepared for action-self-evaluative scale (OR 1.27; 95 % CI 1.04-1.54), increased the likelihood of participation. Physical (50 %) and mental problems (36 %) were leading motives for declining participation.

conclusionsThe results from this study help to distinguish CSs that may not need RTW support, from those who are most in need of RTW support. Practitioners and researchers should tailor RTW support to CSs' socio-demographic, health-related, and work-related characteristics.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Intervention, EducationalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsReturn to WorkSurvivorsUnemploymentYoung AdultCancer survivorsInterventionParticipationReturn to workUnemployment

Identifiers

PMID26935051
PMCPMC4877412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.