Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30689045›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

Respectful encounters from healthcare professionals and return to work among 9032 long-term sick-listed due to cancer or due to other diagnoses: results from a Swedish population-based survey.

Tomas Månsson, Niels Lynøe, Kristina Alexanderson, Elin Hinas, Gert Helgesson, Emilie Friberg

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Returning to Work after Breast Cancer: A One-Year Mixed-Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  2. A multidisciplinary working model for promoting return to work of cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  3. SAGE open nursing
    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

6 authors.

Tomas MånssonStockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. tomas.mansson@ki.se.
Niels LynøeStockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kristina AlexandersonDivision of Insurance Medicine, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Elin HinasDivision of Insurance Medicine, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Gert HelgessonStockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Emilie FribergDivision of Insurance Medicine, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd (SE) 2014-4024Vetenskapsrådet 2014-4024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine whether experiences of positive respectful encounters and negative disrespectful encounters differ between sickness absentees with a cancer diagnosis and sickness absentees with other diagnoses, especially in relation to their ability to return to work (RTW).

methodsA total of 9032 long-term sickness absentees in Sweden responded to a questionnaire (response rate 52%) about experiences of positive and negative encounters with healthcare professionals. The association between different types of such encounters and participants feeling respected or disrespected were calculated with population attributable risk with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The perceived impact on ability to RTW was also examined.

resultsSignificantly, larger proportions among those who experienced a positive encounter and also felt respected stated that those encounters facilitated their ability to RTW, compared to those who experienced a positive encounter without feeling respected: among cancer absentees the difference in proportions were 21% (CI, 7-34) versus 50% (CI, 45-55); among absentees with other diagnoses 42% (CI, 37-47) versus 63% (CI, 61-64). Similar comparisons among sick-listed who experienced negative encounters indicated that also feeling disrespected impeded ability to RTW among a significantly larger proportion of those with other diagnoses [51% (CI, 48-54) versus 35% (CI, 31-39) of those not feeling disrespected]. Among cancer absentees, the corresponding proportions were 20% (CI, 9-30) versus 25% (CI, 9-41).

conclusionsCompared to sickness absentees with other diagnoses, a larger proportion of cancer sickness absentees stated that they were facilitated by respectful encounters and not impeded by disrespectful encounters, regarding self-estimated ability to RTW. More research is needed to examine whether these differences can be associated with use of a patient-centered encountering approach.

Indexed as

Professional-Patient RelationsAbsenteeismAdultElectric ImpedanceEmotionsFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsReturn to WorkSick LeaveSurveys and QuestionnairesSwedenYoung AdultCancerEncountersRespectReturn to workSick leave

Identifiers

PMID30689045
PMCPMC6660489

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.