ArticleRMD open2020
Comparative construct validity of three presenteeism instruments in workers with musculoskeletal complaints: a prospective cohort study.
Article in RMD open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Experiences and Perceptions of Organizational Support Among Chinese Nurses Following Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Measuring, valuing, and incorporating patient and caregiver productivity costs in economic evaluations: a scoping review and environmental scan.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Return on Investment of the Back At Work After Surgery (BAAS) Care Pathway Compared to Care-as-Usual in Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Observational
- Thresholds for unacceptable work state in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis of four presenteeism and two clinical outcome measurement instruments.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Observational
- Supportive and demanding managerial circumstances and associations with excellent workability: a cross-sectional study of Swedish school principals.BMC psychology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the construct validity of three presenteeism instruments, using health and economic outcomes as external references, among working persons reporting musculoskeletal complaints.
methodsData from the prospective Study on Transitions in Employment, Ability and Motivation were used. Presenteeism measurement comprised a global rating of work-ability, and two instruments indicating at-work productivity, and was assessed yearly over 6 years of follow-up. Longitudinal associations between measures of health and subsequent presenteeism, and between presenteeism and subsequent days of sick leave were assessed using generalised estimating equation models. The effect of groups of contextual factors (socio-demographic, lifestyle, personal and work-related factors) was investigated by assessing the change in explained variability.
resultsIn total, 4523 persons were analysed. The association between physical health and work-ability was stronger than both at-work productivity measures; 10 points increase in physical health (0-100, higher is better) was associated with 0.79 points (95% CI 0.75 to 0.84) better work-ability (0-10, higher is better) in the subsequent year. Besides, work-ability best predicted sick leave; one point higher work-ability was associated with 4 days less sick leave (95% CI -5.09 to -3.63) the subsequent year. Personal factors improved model fit for models on health and work-ability, but conflicting results were seen for both at-work productivity instruments.
conclusionWork-ability showed higher construct validity against health and economic outcomes as compared to at-work productivity, which shows that work-ability is different to productivity (losses). Personal factors are especially relevant when interpreting the relation between health and work-ability or self-reported quantity of work.
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.