Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32941491›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Perceived fairness of claimants undergoing a work disability evaluation: Development and validation of the Basel Fairness Questionnaire.

Regine Lohss, Timm Rosburg, Monica Bachmann, Brigitte Walter Meyer, Wout de Boer, Katrin Fischer, Regina Kunz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Regine LohssDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Timm RosburgDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0855-2833
Monica BachmannDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Brigitte Walter MeyerDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Wout de BoerDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Katrin FischerInstitute Humans in Complex Systems, School of Applied Psychology, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.
Regina KunzDepartment of Clinical Research, EbIM, Research & Education, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Basel · CHFHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are currently no tools for assessing claimants' perceived fairness in work disability evaluations. In our study, we describe the development and validation of a questionnaire for this purpose.

methodIn cooperation with subject-matter experts of Swiss insurance medicine, we developed the 30-item Basel Fairness Questionnaire (BFQ). Claimants anonymously answered the questionnaire immediately after their disability evaluation, still unaware about its outcome. For each item, there were four response options, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". The construct validity of the BFQ was assessed by running a principal component analysis (PCA).

resultsIn 4% of the questionnaires, the claimants' perception on the disability evaluation was negative (below the median of the scale). The PCA of the items responses followed by an orthogonal rotation revealed four factors, namely (1) Interviewing Skills, (2) Rapport, (3) Transparency, and (4) Case Familiarity, explaining 63.5% of the total variance. DISCUSSION: The ratings presumably have some positive bias by sample selection and response bias. The PCA factors corresponded to dimensions that subject-matter experts had beforehand identified as relevant. However, all item ratings were highly intercorrelated, which suggests that the presumed underlying dimensions are not independent.

conclusionThe BFQ represents the first self-administered instrument for measuring claimants' perceived fairness of work disability evaluations, allowing the assessment of informational, procedural, and interactive justice from the perspective of claimants. In cooperation with Swiss assessment centres, we plan to implement a refined version of the BFQ as feedback instrument in work disability evaluations.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAdultBiasFemaleHumansInsurance Claim ReviewMaleMiddle AgedPersons with DisabilitiesSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID32941491
PMCPMC7498050
OpenAlexW3087460528

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.