ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2021
Use of a Decision Support Tool on Prognosis of Work Ability in Work Disability Assessments: An Experimental Study Among Insurance Physicians.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The persian version of the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire among iranian post-surgery patients: a translation and psychometrics.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Designing an evidence-based working method for medical work disability prognosis evaluation-an intervention mapping approach.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- The perceived importance of prognostic aspects considered by physicians during work disability evaluation: a survey.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose Assessment of prognosis of work disability is a challenging task for occupational health professionals. An evidence-based decision support tool, based on a prediction model, could aid professionals in the decision-making process. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of such a tool on Dutch insurance physicians' (IPs) prognosis of work ability and their prognostic confidence, and assess IPs' attitudes towards use of the tool. Methods We conducted an experimental study including six case vignettes among 29 IPs. For each vignette, IPs first specified their own prognosis of future work ability and prognostic confidence. Next, IPs were informed about the outcome of the prediction model and asked whether this changed their initial prognosis and prognostic confidence. Finally, respondents reported their attitude towards use of the tool in real practice. Results The concordance between IPs' prognosis and the outcome of the prediction model was low: IPs' prognosis was more positive in 72 (41%) and more negative in 20 (11%) cases. Using the decision support tool, IPs changed their prognosis in only 13% of the cases. IPs prognostic confidence decreased when prognosis was discordant, and remained unchanged when it was concordant. Concerning attitudes towards use, the wish to know more about the tool was considered as the main barrier. Conclusion The efficacy of the tool on IPs' prognosis of work ability and their prognostic confidence was low. Although the perceived barriers were overall limited, only a minority of the IPs indicated that they would be willing to use the tool in practice.
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.