Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30782911›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

The association between having a coordinator and return to work: the rapid-return-to-work cohort study.

Lisebet Skeie Skarpaas, Lise Aasen Haveraaen, Milada Cvancarova Småstuen, William S Shaw, Randi Wågø Aas

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. No longer alone.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Returning to work in lung cancer survivors-a multi-center cross-sectional study in Germany.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lisebet Skeie SkarpaasPresenter - Making Sense of Science, Stavanger, Norway.
Lise Aasen HaveraaenPresenter - Making Sense of Science, Stavanger, Norway.
Milada Cvancarova SmåstuenDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
William S ShawDivision of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
Randi Wågø AasPresenter - Making Sense of Science, Stavanger, Norway.
University of Stavanger · NOOsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University · NOUniversity of Connecticut · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess if the reported provision of a coordinator was associated with time to first return to work (RTW) and first full RTW among sick-listed employees who participated in different rapid-RTW programmes in Norway.

designThe study was designed as a cohort study.

settingRapid-RTW programmes financed by the regional health authority in hospitals and Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration in Norway.

participantsThe sample included employees on full-time sick leave (n=326) who participated in rapid-RTW programmes (n=43), who provided information about the coordination of the services they received. The median age was 46 years (minimum-maximum 21-67) and 71% were female. The most common reported diagnoses were musculoskeletal (57%) and mental health disorders (14%).

interventionsThe employees received different types of individually tailored RTW programmes all aimed at a rapid RTW; occupational rehabilitation (64%), treatment for medical or psychological issues, including assessment, and surgery (26%), and follow-up and work clarification services (10%). It was common to be provided with a coordinator (73%). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were measured as time to first RTW (graded and 100%) and first full RTW (100%).

resultsEmployees provided with a coordinator returned to work later than employees who did not have a coordinator; a median (95% CI) of 128 (80 to 176) days vs 61 (43 to 79) days for first RTW, respectively. This difference did not remain statistically significant in the adjusted regression analysis. For full RTW, there was no statistically significant difference between employees provided with a coordinator versus those who were not.

conclusionsThe model of coordination, provided in the Norwegian rapid-RTW programmes was not associated with a more rapid RTW for sick-listed employees. Rethinking how RTW coordination should be organised could be wise in future programme development.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorProgram EvaluationReturn to WorkAdultAgedFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLongitudinal StudiesMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedMusculoskeletal DiseasesNorwayOccupational Health ServicesProportional Hazards Modelsoccupational rehabilitationreturn to workreturn to work coordinationreturn to work programssick leave

Identifiers

PMID30782911
PMCPMC6398742
OpenAlexW2916361832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.