Trial reportPloS one2018
The assessment of work endurance in disability evaluations across European countries.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward Measuring Cognitive Endurance Capacity: A Proof-of-Principle Study in a Healthy Population.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Residual Work Capacity and (In)Ability to Work Fulltime Among a Year-Cohort of Disability Benefit Applicants Diagnosed with Mental and Behavioural Disorders.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Residual work capacity and (in)ability to work fulltime among a year cohort of cancer survivors who claim a disability benefit.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Article
- Inability to Work Fulltime, Prevalence and Associated Factors Among Applicants for Work Disability Benefit.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Exploring the concept inability to work fulltime in the context of work disability assessments: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeChronic disease is often associated with a reduced energy level, which limits the capacity to work full-time. This study aims to investigate whether the construct work endurance is part of disability assessment in European countries and what assessment procedures are used. We defined work endurance as the ability to sustain working activities for a number of hours per day and per week. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a survey using two self-constructed questionnaires. We addressed 35 experts from 19 countries through the European Union of Medicine in Assurance and Social Security (EUMASS). We gathered descriptive data on various aspects of (the assessment of) work endurance.
resultsExperts from 16 countries responded. In most countries work endurance is assessed. We found few professional guidelines specific for the assessment of work endurance. Both somatic and mental diseases may cause limited work endurance. Methods to assess work endurance vary, objective methods rating as most suitable. Almost half of the countries report controversies on the assessment of work endurance.
conclusionsWork endurance is recognised and assessed as an aspect of work disability assessment in Europe. However, controversies exist and evidence based guidelines, including reliable and valid methods to assess work endurance, are lacking.
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.