ArticleJMIR research protocols2016
Enhancing the Return to Work of Cancer Survivors: Development and Feasibility of the Nurse-Led eHealth Intervention Cancer@Work.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- An online randomized controlled trial, with or without problem-solving treatment, for long-term cancer survivors after hematopoietic cell transplantation.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2018Trial
- Trial
- A scoping review on information and support needs regarding cancer and work: part II-needs of employers and professionals in supporting cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- A scoping review on information and support needs regarding cancer and work: part I - cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- The Cancer and Work Scale (CAWSE): Assessing Return to Work Likelihood and Employment Sustainability After Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Developing mHealth to the Context and Valuation of Injured Patients and Professionals in Hospital Trauma Care: Qualitative and Quantitative Formative Evaluations.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens.JMIR cancer · 2022Review
- eHealth interventions to facilitate work participation: a scoping review.JBI evidence synthesis · 2021Article
- Article
- Supporting employers to enhance the return to work of cancer survivors: development of a web-based intervention (MiLES intervention).Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2020Article
- What Employer Actions Are Considered Most Important for the Return to Work of Employees with Cancer? A Delphi Study Among Employees and Employers.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Farm Owners and Workers as Key Informants in User-Centered Occupational Health Prototype Development: A Stakeholder-Engaged Project.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is important to enhance the return to work of cancer survivors with an appropriate intervention, as cancer survivors experience problems upon their return to work but consider it an essential part of their recovery.
objectiveThe objective of our study was to develop an eHealth intervention to enhance the return to work of cancer survivors and to test the feasibility of the eHealth intervention with end users.
methodsTo develop the intervention we 1) searched the literature, 2) interviewed 7 eHealth experts, 3) interviewed 7 cancer survivors, 2 employers, and 7 occupational physicians, and 4) consulted experts. To test feasibility, we enrolled 39 cancer survivors, 9 supervisors, 7 occupational physicians, 9 general physicians and 2 social workers and gave them access to the eHealth intervention. We also interviewed participants, asked them to fill in a questionnaire, or both, to test which functionalities of the eHealth intervention were appropriate and which aspects needed improvement.
resultsCancer survivors particularly want information and support regarding the possibility of returning to work, and on financial and legal aspects of their situation. Furthermore, the use of blended care and the personalization of the eHealth intervention were preferred features for increasing compliance. The first version of the eHealth intervention consisted of access to a personal and secure website containing various functionalities for cancer survivors blended with support from their specialized nurse, and a public website for employers, occupational physicians, and general physicians. The eHealth intervention appeared feasible. We adapted it slightly by adding more information on different cancer types and their possible effects on return to work.
conclusionsA multistakeholder and mixed-method design appeared useful in the development of the eHealth intervention. It was challenging to meet all end user requirements due to legal and privacy constraints. The eHealth intervention appeared feasible, although implementation in daily practice needs to be subject of further research. CLINICALTRIAL: Dutch Trial Register number (NTR): 5190; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5190 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6hm4WQJqC).
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.