ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2018
Concordance of assessments of clients' mental and behavioral health with in vivo assessment of work performance.
Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aligning metrics with meaning: considerations for measurement selection in disability evaluation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- Students or medical professionals: whose knowledge improved after social-medicine training? Results from a quasi-experimental evaluation study.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAssessing functioning and disability among individuals with mental and behavioral health disorders has historically relied on deriving accurate psychiatric diagnoses and assessing symptoms. However, growing empirical evidence suggests that this approach is inadequate to determine real world performance, particularly with respect to work.
objectiveWe examined a performance-based approach to the assessment of work functioning and its relationship to mental and behavioral health status.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at two mental health programs. Trained employment providers conducted performance-based assessments of work function and ratings of mental and behavioral health while study participants self-reported their mental/behavioral health functioning. We hypothesized that participant and provider ratings of mental/behavioral health would be moderately correlated with performance-based assessments of work function.
resultsWe found no significant correlation between participants' self-report of their mental and behavioral health and performance-based assessments of work. Employment providers' ratings of participants' mental/behavioral health were moderately correlated with performance-based measures of work. Finally, we found low concordance between employment providers and study participants' with respect to ratings of their mental/behavioral health.
conclusionsContrary to our hypotheses, ratings of mental/behavioral health were only moderately correlated with performance-based measures of work. Results confirm earlier research suggesting that it is difficult to predict work performance from participants' self-reports of their mental/behavioral health alone. Performance-based assessments of work capacity as well as ratings of mental and behavioral health may both be needed for a more complete and complimentary picture of the ability of individuals with mental and behavioral health disorders to function in the work place.
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.