ArticleBMJ open2020
Independent medical evaluation of general practitioners' follow-up of sick-listed patients: a cross-sectional study in Norway.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02524392 (Effect Evaluation of Independent Medical Evaluation), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Effect Evaluation of Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) After Six Months Sick Leave: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) Versus Treatment as Usual in Norway
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- What is the effect of independent medical evaluation on days on sickness benefits for long-term sick listed employees in Norway? A pragmatic randomised controlled trial, the NIME-trial.BMC public health · 2022Trial
- The influence of socio-demographic and clinical factors on sick leave and return to work after open-heart surgery: a nationwide registry-based cohort study.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2024Article
- Poorer mental well-being and prior unmet need for mental healthcare: a longitudinal population-based study on men in Sweden.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe study was designed to examine the sufficiency of general practitioners' (GPs) follow-up of patients on sick leave, assessed by independent medical evaluators.
designCross-sectional study
settingPrimary health care in the Western part of Norway. The study reuses data from a randomised controlled trial-the Norwegian independent medical evaluation trial (NIME trial).
participantsThe intervention group in the NIME trial: Sick-listed workers having undergone an independent medical evaluation by an experienced GP at 6 months of unremitting sick leave (n=937; 57% women). In the current study, the participants were distributed into six exposure groups defined by gender and main sick leave diagnoses (women/musculoskeletal, men/musculoskeletal, women/mental, men/mental, women/all other diagnoses and men/all other diagnoses). OUTCOME MEASURE: The independent medical evaluators assessment (yes/no) of the sufficiency of the regular GPs follow-up of their sick-listed patients.
resultsEstimates from generalised linear models demonstrate a robust association between men with mental sick leave diagnoses and insufficient follow-up by their regular GP first 6 months of sick leave (adjusted relative risk (RR)=1.8, 95% CI=1.15-1.68). Compared with the reference group, women with musculoskeletal sick leave diagnoses, this was the only significant finding. Men with musculoskeletal diagnoses (adjusted RR=1.4, 95% CI=0.92-2.09); men with other diagnoses (adjusted RR=1.0, 95% CI=0.58-1.73); women with mental diagnoses (adjusted RR=1.2, 95% CI=0.75-1.77) and women with other diagnoses (adjusted RR=1.3, 95% CI=0.58-1.73).
conclusionsAssessment by an independent medical evaluator showed that men with mental sick leave diagnoses may be at risk of insufficient follow-up by their GP. Efforts should be made to clarify unmet needs to initiate relevant actions in healthcare and work life. Avoiding marginalisation in work life is of the utmost importance. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02524392; Post-results.
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.