SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2023
How Much Does Presenteeism Change in Response to Interventions or Alterations in Health Status? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Using the COSMIN Methodology.
Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring presenteeism trends: a comprehensive bibliometric and content analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to estimate the extent to which measures of presenteeism among workers change in response to alterations in health status induced by treatment or natural history. Methods We searched eight databases in August 2020 for studies published since 2012 measuring presenteeism longitudinally. Two independent reviewers screened the titles, abstracts, and full-text articles and performed data extraction. Studies were stratified into longitudinal studies using presenteeism as an outcome and measurement studies designed to test the responsiveness of presenteeism measures. We appraised the methodological quality of the measurement studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. Standardized response means (SRMs) for interventional studies where participants reported improvement on anchor measures were quantitatively pooled.Results Our searches returned 2882 results. Eleven measurement studies and 126 longitudinal studies were included. Of the measurement studies (n = 2625 participants), 7 had adequate study quality and 4 studies were deemed doubtful. Anchors and responsiveness methods varied considerably. Our estimate of responsiveness from 5 measurement studies and 4 presenteeism measures is an SRM of 0.85 (95% CI 0.77, 0.92) and Cohen's d of 0.54 (95% CI 0.49, 0.58), translating to an average important change of 17/100. For deterioration, the value is - 17/100. Conclusions We found considerable variation regarding how responsiveness data was reported in measurement studies. There is evidence that responsiveness is strong for four presenteeism measures: the Work Productivity Survey, the Work Functioning Impairment Scale, the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire, and the Nurses Work Functioning Questionnaire.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36399282What 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.