ReviewJournal of occupational rehabilitation2016
Workplace Outcomes in Work-Disability Prevention Research: A Review with Recommendations for Future Research.
Review in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding sustainable return to work during gender transition, a (mixed method) diary-based single-case study of a transgender woman: Spiegel im spiegel.International journal of transgender health · 2026Article
- Successful Strategies for Occupational Health and Safety in Small and Medium Enterprises: Insights for a Sustainable Return to Work.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Review
- A prospective cohort study of presenteeism and increased risk of unemployment among Japanese workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of occupational health · 2024Article
- Predictors of time until return to work and duration of sickness absence in sick-listed precarious workers with common mental disorders: a secondary data-analysis of two trials and one cohort study.International journal of mental health systems · 2023Article
- How do Employees with Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders Experience the Management of Their Condition in the Workplace? A Metasynthesis.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2023Review
- Employees Receiving Inpatient Treatment for Common Mental Disorders in Germany: Factors Associated with Time to First and Full Return to Work.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Work disability negotiations between supervisors and occupational health services: factors that support supervisors in work disability management.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2021Article
- Article
- Returning to work after sickness absence due to common mental disorders: study design and baseline findings from an 18 months mixed methods follow-up study in Germany.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Differences Over Time in the Prognostic Effect of Return to Work Self-Efficacy on a Sustained Return to Work.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Do individual and work-related factors differentiate work participation trajectories before and after vocational rehabilitation?PloS one · 2019Article
- Disability and functioning assessment of women with RSI/WRMSDs: the use of the ICF checklist.Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT · 2019Article
- Implementation Science and Employer Disability Practices: Embedding Implementation Factors in Research Designs.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Outcome assessment is a central issue in work disability prevention research. The goal of this paper was to (1) ascertain the most salient workplace outcomes; (2) evaluate the congruence between business and science perspectives; (3) illustrate new perspectives on assessing longitudinal outcomes; and (4) provide recommendations for advancing outcome evaluation in this area of research. Methods The authors participated in a year-long collaboration that culminated in a sponsored 3-day conference, "Improving Research of Employer Practices to Prevent Disability", held October 14-16, 2015, in Hopkinton, MA, 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 a special panel of knowledge experts with direct employer experience. Results Numerous workplace work-disability prevention outcome measures were identified. Analysis indicated that their applicability varied depending on the type of work disability the worker was experiencing. For those who were working, but with health-related work limitations (Type 1), predominant outcomes were measures of productivity, presenteeism, and work-related limitations. For those who were off work due to a health condition (Type 2), predominant outcomes were measures of time off work, supervisor/employee interactions, and return-to-work (RTW) preparation. For those who had returned to work (Type 3), predominant outcomes were measures of presenteeism, time until RTW, percentage of work resumption, employment characteristics, stigma, work engagement, co-worker interactions, and sustained or durable RTW. For those who had withdrawn from the labor force (Type 4), predominant outcomes were cost and vocational status. Discussion Currently available measures provide a good basis to use more consistent outcomes in disability prevention in the future. The research area would also benefit from more involvement of employers as stakeholders, and multilevel conceptualizations of disability outcomes.
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.