Trial reportBMC public health2021
A randomised feasibility trial of an employer-based intervention for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors (MiLES intervention).
Trial report in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic factors for return to work in breast cancer survivors.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The experiences and perceptions of employers on cancer survivors returning to work: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Non-medical interventions to enhance return to work for people with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A multidisciplinary intervention to support return to work of individuals with breast cancer: a prospective feasibility study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding prostate cancer and early screening among middle-aged and elderly Chinese men: a cross-sectional study.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of a mobile-based return to work program for decent return to work, fatigue, stress, and quality of working life among cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Consolidated guidance for behavioral intervention pilot and feasibility studies.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- Expert Perspectives on Pilot and Feasibility Studies: A Delphi Study and Consolidation of Considerations for Behavioral Interventions.Research square · 2023Article
- Cancer survivors and adverse work outcomes: associated factors and supportive interventions.British medical bulletin · 2023Review
- The challenges of managing patients with cancer in the workplace: Needs, opportunities and perspectives of occupational physicians.PloS one · 2023Article
- Supporting the Return to Work of Breast Cancer Survivors: From a Theoretical to a Clinical Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmployers express a need for support during sickness absence and return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. Therefore, a web-based intervention (MiLES) targeted at employers with the objective of enhancing cancer survivors' successful RTW has been developed. This study aimed to assess feasibility of a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention. Also preliminary results on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention were obtained.
methodsA randomised feasibility trial of 6 months was undertaken with cancer survivors aged 18-63 years, diagnosed with cancer < 2 years earlier, currently in paid employment, and sick-listed < 1 year. Participants were randomised to an intervention group, with their employer receiving the MiLES intervention, or to a waiting-list control group (2:1). Feasibility of a future definitive RCT was determined on the basis of predefined criteria related to method and protocol-related uncertainties (e.g. reach, retention, appropriateness). The primary effect measure (i.e. successful RTW) and secondary effect measures (e.g. quality of working life) were assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months thereafter.
resultsThirty-five cancer survivors were included via medical specialists (4% of the initially invited group) and open invitations, and thereafter randomised to the intervention (n = 24) or control group (n = 11). Most participants were female (97%) with breast cancer (80%) and a permanent employment contract (94%). All predefined criteria for feasibility of a future definitive RCT were achieved, except that concerning the study's reach (90 participants). After 6 months, 92% of the intervention group and 100% of the control group returned to work (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.03); no difference were found with regard to secondary effect measures.
conclusionsWith the current design a future definitive RCT on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention on successful RTW of cancer survivors is not feasible, since recruitment of survivors fell short of the predefined minimum for feasibility. There was selection bias towards survivors at low risk of adverse work outcomes, which reduced generalisability of the outcomes. An alternative study design is needed to study effectiveness of the MiLES intervention.
trial registrationThe study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NL6758/NTR7627 ).
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.