ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2017
External Validation and Update of a Prediction Rule for the Duration of Sickness Absence Due to Common Mental Disorders.
Article 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 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Work-Related Psychosocial Risk and Protective Factors Influencing Workplace Sickness Absence: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Biopsychosocial predictors and trajectories of work participation after transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation of participants with mental and somatic disorders: a cohort study.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Tools Appraisal of Organizational Factors Associated with Return-to-Work in Workers on Sick Leave Due to Musculoskeletal and Common Mental Disorders: A Systematic Search and Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Review
- Article
- Observational
- Determinants of Sickness Absence and Return to Work Among Employees with Common Mental Disorders: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Reliability and Validity of the Work and Well-Being Inventory (WBI) for Employees.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose The objective of the present study was to validate an existing prediction rule (including age, education, depressive/anxiety symptoms, and recovery expectations) for predictions of the duration of sickness absence due to common mental disorders (CMDs) and investigate the added value of work-related factors. Methods A prospective cohort study including 596 employees who reported sick with CMDs in the period from September 2013 to April 2014. Work-related factors were measured at baseline with the Questionnaire on the Experience and Evaluation of Work. During 1-year follow-up, sickness absence data were retrieved from an occupational health register. The outcome variables of the study were sickness absence (no = 0, yes = 1) at 3 and 6 months after reporting sick with CMDs. Discrimination between workers with and without sickness absence was investigated at 3 and 6 months with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results A total of 220 (37 %) employees agreed to participate and 211 (35 %) had complete data for analysis. Discrimination was poor with AUC = 0.69 and AUC = 0.55 at 3 and 6 months, respectively. When 'variety in work' was added as predictor variable, discrimination between employees with and without CMD sickness absence improved to AUC = 0.74 (at 3 months) and AUC = 0.62 (at 6 months). Conclusions The original prediction rule poorly predicted CMD sickness absence duration. After adding 'variety in work', the prediction rule discriminated between employees with and without CMD sickness absence 3 months after reporting sick. This new prediction rule remains to be validated in other populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.