Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35501737›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Return to work factors and vocational rehabilitation interventions for long-term, partially disabled workers: a modified Delphi study among vocational rehabilitation professionals.

Christa J C de Geus, Maaike A Huysmans, H Jolanda van Rijssen, Johannes R Anema

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christa J C de GeusDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Maaike A HuysmansDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. m.huijsmans@amsterdamumc.nl.
H Jolanda van RijssenDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Johannes R AnemaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLUitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-term disability has a great impact on both society and workers with disabilities. Little is known about the barriers which prohibit workers with long-term disabilities from returning to work and which interventions are best suited to counteract these barriers. The main purpose of this study was to obtain consensus among professionals on important return to work (RTW) factors and effective vocational rehabilitation (VR) interventions for long-term (> 2 years), partially disabled workers. Our three research questions were: (1) which factors are associated with RTW for long-term disabled workers?; (2) which factors associated with RTW can be targeted by VR interventions?; and (3) which VR interventions are the most effective to target these factors?

methodsA modified Delphi Study was conducted using a panel of 22 labour experts, caseworkers, and insurance physicians. The study consisted of several rounds of questionnaires and one online meeting.

resultsThe multidisciplinary panel reached consensus that 58 out of 67 factors were important for RTW and that 35 of these factors could be targeted using VR interventions. In five rounds, the expert panel reached consensus that 11 out of 22 VR interventions were effective for at least one of the eight most important RTW factors.

conclusionsConsensus was reached among the expert panel that many factors that are important for the RTW of short-term disabled workers are also important for the RTW of long-term partially disabled workers and that a substantial number of these factors could effectively be targeted using VR interventions. The results of this study will be used to develop a decision aid that supports vocational rehabilitation professionals in profiling clients and in choosing suitable VR interventions.

Indexed as

Persons with DisabilitiesReturn to WorkDelphi TechniqueHumansRehabilitation, VocationalSurveys and QuestionnairesDecision aidDisability pensionInsurance physiciansLabour expertsLong-term sick leaveReturn to work

Identifiers

PMID35501737
PMCPMC9063173
OpenAlexW4225263984

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.