Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32932972›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Return to Work after Common Mental Disorders: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Expectations of the Involved Stakeholders.

Jessica Scharf, Peter Angerer, Gesine Müting, Adrian Loerbroks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Well-Being at Work after Return to Work (RTW): A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Collaboration between occupational health services and other health care: a scoping review.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Migraine self-management at work: a qualitative study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Jessica ScharfInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Düsseldorf, Universitätsstr. 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.
Peter AngererInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Düsseldorf, Universitätsstr. 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9602-7405
Gesine MütingInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Düsseldorf, Universitätsstr. 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.
Adrian LoerbroksInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Düsseldorf, Universitätsstr. 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Common mental disorders (CMDs) are risk factors for long-term sickness absence and unemployment. Therefore, return-to-work (RTW) processes have been introduced to facilitate the return of employees. As the success of RTW processes is considered to be determined by the cooperativeness of the involved stakeholders, we aimed to investigate the views of those stakeholders to disclose potentially diverging expectations. Qualitative interviews were conducted (08/2018-04/2019) among five stakeholder groups: returnees with a diagnosed CMD who were eligible for a RTW process; health care professionals nominated by the returnees; supervisors, colleagues and occupational physicians (the latter three groups were not nominated by the returnees). In total, 24 returnees, 13 health care professionals, 13 occupational physicians, 9 supervisors and 9 colleagues were interviewed (68 interviews in total). Potentially diverging expectations of the stakeholders related to whether diagnoses need to be disclosed by returnees. Agreement existed in terms of the need for a trustful relationship between employees and occupational physicians to initiate a RTW process early. As the understanding of all stakeholders' viewpoints is one of the main factors promoting a successful RTW, we explored the expectations of those involved in the RTW process. One implication of our findings is to strengthen the role of occupational physicians, who could coordinate the return process.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersReturn to WorkAdultCooperative BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationQualitative ResearchSick Leavecommon mental disordersoccupational physicianqualitative studyreturn to work

Identifiers

PMID32932972
PMCPMC7558125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.