Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27614465›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2016

Workplace Interventions to Prevent Disability from Both the Scientific and Practice Perspectives: A Comparison of Scientific Literature, Grey Literature and Stakeholder Observations.

Kelly Williams-Whitt, Ute Bültmann, Benjamin Amick, Fehmidah Munir, Torill H Tveito, Johannes R Anema, Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. No longer alone.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Kelly Williams-WhittUniversity of Lethbridge, 4401 University Drive, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada. kelly.williams@uleth.ca.
Ute BültmannUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Community and Occupational Medicine, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Benjamin AmickRobert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
Fehmidah MunirSchool of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire, UK.
Torill H TveitoUni Research Health, Bergen, Norway.
Johannes R AnemaVU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hopkinton Conference Working Group on Workplace Disability Prevention
Loughborough University · GBUniversity of Lethbridge · CAAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of South-Eastern Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose The significant individual and societal burden of work disability could be reduced if supportive workplace strategies could be added to evidence-based clinical treatment and rehabilitation to improve return-to-work (RTW) and other disability outcomes. The goal of this article is to summarize existing research on workplace interventions to prevent disability, relate these to employer disability management practices, and recommend future research priorities. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that ultimately led to an invited 3-day conference, Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability, held October 14-16, 2015, in Hopkinton, Massachusetts, USA. The collaboration included a topical review of the literature, group conference calls to identify key areas and challenges, drafting of initial documents, review of industry publications, and a conference presentation that included feedback from peer researchers and a question/answer session with an expert panel with direct employer experience. Results Evidence from randomized trials and other research designs has shown general support for job modification, RTW coordination, and organizational support, but evidence is still lacking for interventions at a more granular level. Grey literature reports focused mainly on job re-design and work organization. Panel feedback focused on organizational readiness and the beliefs and values of senior managers as critical factors in facilitating changes to disability management practices. While the scientific literature is focused on facilitating improved coping and reducing discomforts for individual workers, the employer-directed grey literature is focused on making group-level changes to policies and procedures. Conclusions Future research might better target employer practices by tying interventions to positive workplace influences and determinants, by developing more participatory interventions and research designs, and by designing interventions that address factors of organizational change.

Indexed as

HumansOccupational HealthOccupational InjuriesPeriodicals as TopicPublicationsWorkplaceDisability preventionEmployer practicesResearch prioritiesWorkplace interventions

Identifiers

PMID27614465
PMCPMC5104758
OpenAlexW2515928891

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.