Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30110333›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2018

Prognostic factors for return to work and work disability among colorectal cancer survivors; A systematic review.

Chantal M den Bakker, Johannes R Anema, AnneClaire G N M Zaman, Henrika C W de Vet, Linda Sharp, Eva Angenete, Marco E Allaix, Rene H J Otten, Judith A F Huirne, Hendrik J Bonjer and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Long-term work retention after treatment for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Social inequalities in return-to-work among colorectal cancer survivors in Germany.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Return to Work in Colorectal Cancer Patients.International journal of hematology-oncology and stem cell research · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Chantal M den BakkerDepartment of Occupational and Public Health, VU University medical center, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2228-517X
Johannes R AnemaDepartment of Occupational and Public Health, VU University medical center, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
AnneClaire G N M ZamanAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henrika C W de VetDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, VU University medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Linda SharpInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom.
Eva AngeneteDepartment of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Göteburg, Sweden.
Marco E AllaixDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Rene H J OttenMedical Library, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6485-8810
Judith A F HuirneDepartment of Gynaecology, VU University medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hendrik J BonjerDepartment of Surgery, VU University medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Angela G E M de BoerAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Frederieke G SchaafsmaDepartment of Occupational and Public Health, VU University medical center, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Gothenburg · SEUniversity of Turin · ITVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer is diagnosed progressively in employed patients due to screening programs and increasing retirement age. The objective of this study was to identify prognostic factors for return to work and work disability in patients with colorectal cancer.

methodsThe research protocol was published at PROSPERO with registration number CRD42017049757. A systematic review of cohort and case-control studies in colorectal cancer patients above 18 years, who were employed when diagnosed, and who had a surgical resection with curative intent were included. The primary outcome was return to work or work disability. Potentially prognostic factors were included in the analysis if they were measured in at least three studies. Risk of bias was assessed according to the QUality In Prognosis Studies tool. A qualitative synthesis analysis was performed due to heterogeneity between studies. Quality of evidence was evaluated according to Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

resultsEight studies were included with a follow-up period of 26 up to 520 weeks. (Neo)adjuvant therapy, higher age, and more comorbidities had a significant negative influence on return to work. A previous period of unemployment, extensive surgical resection and postoperative complications significantly increased the risk of work disability. The quality of evidence for these prognostic factors was considered very low to moderate.

conclusionHealth care professionals need to be aware of these prognostic factors to select patients eligible for timely intensified rehabilitation in order to optimize the return to work process and prevent work disability.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsHumansPrognosisReturn to Work

Identifiers

PMID30110333
PMCPMC6093640
OpenAlexW2887637986

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.