Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29733048›Full record

ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2018

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 to Norwegian and Danish.

Thomas Johansen, Thomas Lund, Chris Jensen, Anne-Mette Hedeager Momsen, Monica Eftedal, Irene Øyeflaten, Tore N Braathen, Christina M Stapelfeldt, Ben Amick, Merete Labriola

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04631302 (Work Engagement and Well-being Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04631302 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Work Engagement and Well-being Study (SWELL): A Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial Evaluating the Effects of Mindfulness Versus Light Physical Exercise at Work

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences UnitRan2021 to 2023Enrolled241ConditionsMindfulness, ExerciseArmsBe Mindful, Light exercise course
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors.

Thomas JohansenNational Advisory Unit on Occupational Rehabilitation, Rauland, Norway.
Thomas LundCentre for Social Medicine, Frederiksberg & Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Chris JensenNational Advisory Unit on Occupational Rehabilitation, Rauland, Norway.
Anne-Mette Hedeager MomsenDEFACTUM, Social and Health Services and Labour Market, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Monica EftedalNational Advisory Unit on Occupational Rehabilitation, Rauland, Norway.
Irene ØyeflatenNational Advisory Unit on Occupational Rehabilitation, Rauland, Norway.
Tore N BraathenUniversity College of Southeast Norway, Porsgrunn, Norway.
Christina M StapelfeldtDEFACTUM, Social and Health Services and Labour Market, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Ben AmickInstitute for Work and Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Merete LabriolaDEFACTUM, Social and Health Services and Labour Market, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA healthy and productive working life has attracted attention owing to future employment and demographic challenges.

objectiveThe aim was to translate and adapt the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire (WRFQ) 2.0 to Norwegian and Danish.

methodsThe WRFQ is a self-administered tool developed to identify health-related work limitations. Standardised cross-cultural adaptation procedures were followed in both countries' translation processes. Direct translation, synthesis, back translation and consolidation were carried out successfully.

resultsA pre-test among 78 employees who had returned to work after sickness absence found idiomatic issues requiring reformulation in the instructions, four items in the Norwegian version, and three items in the Danish version, respectively. In the final versions, seven items were adjusted in each country. Psychometric properties were analysed for the Norwegian sample (n = 40) and preliminary Cronbach's alpha coefficients were satisfactory. A final consensus process was performed to achieve similar titles and introductions.

conclusionsThe WRFQ 2.0 cross-cultural adaptation to Norwegian and Danish was performed and consensus was obtained. Future validation studies will examine validity, reliability, responsiveness and differential item response. The WRFQ can be used to elucidate both individual and work environmental factors leading to a more holistic approach in work rehabilitation.

Indexed as

AdultCross-Cultural ComparisonDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorwayPersons with DisabilitiesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesTranslatingWork Capacity EvaluationTranslationwork disability measurementwork outcome measurework participationwork rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID29733048
PMCPMC5929307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.