Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36578011›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Development of the core of an ICF-based instrument for the assessment of work capacity and guidance in return to work of employees on sick leave: a multidisciplinary modified Delphi study.

Astrid de Wind, Birgit H P M Donker-Cools, Lyanne Jansen, Clare H Luymes, Sylvia J van der Burg-Vermeulen, Shirley Oomens, Johannes R Anema, Frederieke G Schaafsma

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Astrid de WindAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. a.dewind@amsterdamumc.nl.
Birgit H P M Donker-CoolsAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Lyanne JansenAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Clare H LuymesAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Sylvia J van der Burg-VermeulenAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Shirley OomensHAN University of Applied Sciences, Occupation and health research group, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
Johannes R AnemaAmsterdam Public Health research institute, Societal Participation and Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Frederieke G SchaafsmaAmsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral occupational health disciplines are involved in return to work guidance, implying that good interdisciplinary collaboration is important. A shared conceptual framework and a common language for the assessment of work capacity and guidance in return to work is expected to be at the benefit of appropriate and sustainable employability of sick employees. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) can be considered a shared conceptual framework and is also promising in terms of a common language. The purpose of the current study is to reach multidisciplinary consensus among occupational health professionals on the content of an ICF-based instrument for the assessment of work capacity and guidance in return to work.

methodsTo obtain multidisciplinary consensus we conducted a modified Delphi study among twelve occupational health experts, including four occupational physicians, four insurance physicians and four labour experts. The study included two e-mail rounds and two virtual meetings. In the consecutive rounds the experts assessed ICF items as well as a list of non-ICF-based work-related environmental factors on their relevance for the assessment of the work capacity and guidance in return to work together with their interpretability.

resultsThe four consecutive Delphi rounds resulted in 20 items that are minimally needed for the assessment of the work capacity and return to work possibilities of employees on sick leave. The final list included six items on personal functioning, seven items on social functioning and seven items on physical functioning.

conclusionsThis set of items forms the core of an ICF-based instrument, which is expected to facilitate interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary communication because of the use of a shared conceptual framework. As such, it should be of help in the guidance in return to work of employees on sick leave and contribute to appropriate and sustainable employability.

Indexed as

Return to WorkSick LeaveCommunicationDelphi TechniqueDisability EvaluationEmploymentHumansDelphi techniqueDisabilityReturn to workSick leaveWork capacity

Identifiers

PMID36578011
PMCPMC9795420
OpenAlexW4313417522

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.