Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33630238›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2021

The Return-to-Work Self-efficacy Questionnaire (RTW-SE): A Validation Study of Predictive Abilities and Cut-off Values for Patients on Sick Leave Due to Anxiety or Depression.

Ragne G H Gjengedal, Suzanne E Lagerveld, Silje E Reme, Kåre Osnes, Kenneth Sandin, Odin Hjemdal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. The relationship between returning to work self-efficacy, anxiety, and depression in renal cancer patients: a cross-lagged analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. 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

6 authors.

Ragne G H GjengedalDiakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. Ragne.gjengedal@diakonsyk.no.
Suzanne E LagerveldThe Dutch Institute for Employee Benefit Schemes (UWV), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Silje E RemeDiakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Kåre OsnesDiakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Kenneth SandinDiakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Odin HjemdalDiakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the validity of the Return-to-Work Self-efficacy Questionnaire (RTW-SE) in a Norwegian sample of patients with common mental disorders. The secondary aim was to provide validated cut-off scores for the RTW-SE. Methods Among patients receiving work-focused therapy (N = 626), the RTW-SE was measured pre-and post-treatment, and work status was assessed up to one-year post-treatment. The factor structure, internal consistency and construct validity were assessed. Furthermore, post-treatment cut-off scores were calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for patients on sick leave at baseline (n = 314) and at the end of treatment (n = 145). The predictive ability of the suggested RTW-SE cut-off scores were investigated longitudinally. Results Exploratory principal component analysis identified a one-factor solution with high internal consistency (0.91). RTW-SE exhibited small to moderate negative correlations with measures of depression and anxiety, and was significantly different between subgroups of patients with different work status, supporting construct validity. Pre- and post-treatment RTW-SE scores significantly predicted full return to work at 3, 6 and 12 months post-treatment. ROC analysis suggested an upper cut-off score of 4.6, associated with full RTW, and lower cut-off score of 3.7, associated with partial RTW. These cut-offs showed acceptable discriminative ability and significant longitudinal predictive ability. Conclusion The RTW-SE possesses good psychometric properties and the suggested cut-off scores have significant predictive ability in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

Return to WorkSick LeaveAnxietyDepressionHumansSelf EfficacySurveys and QuestionnairesAnxietyCommon mental disordersDepressionReturn to work interventionsReturn-to-work self-efficacySick leave

Identifiers

PMID33630238
PMCPMC8298338

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.