Observational studyJournal of occupational rehabilitation2019
Australian General Practitioners' and Compensable Patients: Factors Affecting Claim Management and Return to Work.
Observational study in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Injured Workers' Experiences of General Practitioner Care Across Dual Healthcare Funding Systems: A Qualitative Study in an Australian Workers' Compensation Context.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Collaboration Between General Practice and Sickness Benefits Office in Return to Work Processes-A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Clinician Experiences of and Responses to the Challenges of Working with Patients in the Australian Compensation Setting.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Primary Care Physicians' Learning Needs in Returning Ill or Injured Workers to Work. A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose General Practitioners (GPs) play an important role in personal injury compensation systems yet system processes have been perceived as burdensome. Objectives were to (1) determine attitudes of Australian GPs on health benefits of return to work (RTW) after injury/illness and (2) identify associations between GP characteristics and agreement with issues surrounding treating compensable patients. Methods Cross-sectional postal survey of 423 Australian GPs to determine agreement with issues associated with compensable patients (including patient advocacy, conflicting opinions between GPs and compensation systems, fitness-for-work certification, and refusal to treat). Results The vast majority of GPs agreed there was a health benefit to early RTW. GPs with 16-20 years' experience had significantly higher odds of agreeing that the certificate of work capacity is the primary method of communication between RTW stakeholders (OR 2.36 [1.13-4.92]) than those with greater experience. 49% of GPs agreed they should be able to refuse to treat compensable patients. Female GPs had significantly lower odds (OR 0.60 [0.40-0.90]) of agreeing with right to refuse than male GPs, as did those from remote or regional practices (OR 0.43 [0.20-0.94]; OR 0.60 [0.39-0.92]) than GPs from urban practices. Conclusions Reducing administrative barriers identified by Australian GPs and improving communication with compensation systems will likely have a positive impact on their refusal to treat compensable patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30715662What 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.