ArticleTrials2022
The effect of the Progressive Goal Attainment Program on cognitions, perceptions, and work participation of workers with chronic health problems: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors associated with return to work among disability claimants with depression.African journal of disability · 2025Article
- Don't be late! Postponing cognitive decline and preventing early unemployment in people with multiple sclerosis: a study protocol.BMC neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitions and perceptions of workers with chronic health problems, such as catastrophizing thoughts and fear-avoidance beliefs, can negatively influence work participation. The Progressive Goal Attainment Program (PGAP) is an intervention developed in Canada with the aim of decreasing limiting cognitions and perceptions and increasing work participation. The objective of this protocol article is to describe the design of a randomized controlled superiority trial to study whether PGAP is effective in decreasing limiting cognitions and perceptions and increasing workability and work participation of workers with chronic health problems in the Netherlands.
methodsThis study is a randomized controlled superiority trial with two (parallel) groups, in which workers on sick leave are randomly assigned to an intervention group (PGAP intervention) or to a waiting-list control group (care as usual). The PGAP intervention consists of a maximum of 10 weekly individual sessions provided by a trained PGAP professional in which the worker learns about staying active, planning activities, and setting goals. Participants in this risk-targeted behavioral activation intervention also learn to be more aware of their cognitions and perceptions and learn about solution-focused problem-solving skills in challenging situations. The primary outcome is the degree of catastrophizing. Secondary outcomes are other personal cognitions and perceptions (e.g., expectations regarding return to work, self-efficacy), health symptoms (e.g., fatigue, depression), work participation (e.g., sick leave status, work hours), and other work-related outcomes (e.g., workability, quality of working life). DISCUSSION: Although PGAP shows positive effects in Canada, we do not know whether this intervention is effective in the Netherlands. This study is the first randomized controlled trial to test the effect of PGAP on limiting cognitions and perceptions and on work participation of workers with chronic health problems in the Netherlands. If PGAP is effective it could be implemented in the Netherlands in order to stimulate workability and work participation of workers.
trial registrationThe protocol of this study is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL9832) in October 2021.
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.