Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27150734›Full record

Trial reportJournal of occupational rehabilitation2017

Process Evaluation of a Blended Web-Based Intervention on Return to Work for Sick-Listed Employees with Common Mental Health Problems in the Occupational Health Setting.

D Volker, M C Zijlstra-Vlasveld, E P M Brouwers, C M van der Feltz-Cornelis

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D VolkerTrimbos-institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, P.O. Box 725, 3500 AS, Utrecht, The Netherlands. dvolker@trimbos.nl.
M C Zijlstra-VlasveldTrimbos-institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, P.O. Box 725, 3500 AS, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
E P M BrouwersTranzo Department, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
C M van der Feltz-CornelisTranzo Department, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Tilburg University · NLTrimbos Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose A blended web-based intervention, "eHealth module embedded in collaborative occupational health care" (ECO), aimed at return to work, was developed and found effective in sick-listed employees with common mental disorders. In order to establish the feasibility of ECO, a process evaluation was conducted. Methods Seven process components were investigated: recruitment, reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity, satisfaction and context. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data: an online questionnaire for the employees, website data, telephonic interviews with occupational physicians (OPs) and observations of the researchers. Results Recruitment was uncomplicated for the employees, but required several steps for the OPs. Reach was 100 % at the OP level and 76.3 % at the employee level. Dose delivered and received for OPs: 91.6 % received minimally one email message. Dose delivered and received for the employees: finishing of the different modules of ECO varied between 13 and 90 %. Fidelity: the support of the OP to the employee in ECO was lower than anticipated. Satisfaction: both employees and OPs were satisfied with the intervention. However, employees reported a need for more support in ECO. The context showed that OPs had limited time to support the employees and it was impossible for the employee to contact the OP outside their regular contacts. Conclusion Feasibility of ECO and satisfaction of employees and OPs with ECO were good. Fidelity of OPs was limited. For further implementation in the occupational health setting, especially contextual barriers regarding time limitation and accessibility of OPs for employees should be addressed.

Indexed as

Occupational Health ServicesReturn to WorkSick LeaveFeasibility StudiesHumansInternetMental DisordersPatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTelephoneCommon mental disorderseHealthFeasibilityOccupational healthProcess evaluationReturn to work

Identifiers

PMID27150734
PMCPMC5405094
OpenAlexW2355294737

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.