SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023
Examination of the knowledge gap of return-to-work outcomes in routine outpatient treatment for common mental disorders: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Process Evaluation of a Problem-Solving Intervention with Workplace Involvement for Employees on Sickness Absence Due to Common Mental Disorders in Swedish Primary Health Care.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Work disability status following routine mental health treatment: a Norwegian registry-based cohort study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Responsiveness of European countries to the population mental health needs: A cross-national comparison study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Article
- Associations between employment status, type of occupation, and mental health problems in a treatment seeking sample.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Little is known about the effects of routine mental health care on return-to-work (RTW) outcomes. This systematic review aimed to summarize and evaluate the effects of clinical representative psychotherapy on RTW among patients with a common mental disorder (CMD), treated within public mental health care. Method: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and SveMED+. Primary outcomes were RTW, sick leave status, or self-reported work functioning. Studies limited to specific treatments and/or specific patient groups were excluded. Results: Out of 1,422 records, only one article met the preregistered inclusion criteria. After broadening of criteria, a total of nine studies were included. Six were randomized controlled trials (RCT), two were register-based studies, and one was a quasi-experimental study. Descriptions of treatment duration and intensity of usual care were rarely specified but ranged from a few sessions to 3 years of psychotherapy. In the RCTs, two studies favored the intervention, one favored routine care, and three found no difference between conditions. Choice of outcomes differed greatly and included RTW rates (full or partial), number of days until RTW, change in sick leave status, and net days/months of work absence. Time points for outcome assessment also varied greatly from 3 months to 5 years after treatment. Conclusion: There is inconclusive evidence to establish to what extent routine mental healthcare is associated with improved RTW outcomes for patients with CMD. There is a need for more and better clinical trials and naturalistic studies detailing the content of routine treatment and its effect on RTW. Systematic review registration: This study was pre-registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022304967), https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022304967.
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.