ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2024
Validation of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale for Women on Sick Leave Due to Breast Cancer (ROSES-BC).
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBreast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women. Approximately 40% of BC survivors are diagnosed during the peak years of their professional career. Women face numerous obstacles when returning to work (RTW) after BC. Their decision-making process and self-efficacy to overcome these barriers may undergo alterations. The objective of this study was to validate the Return-to-work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) for BC survivors, with a focus on three psychometric properties: construct validity, test-retest reliability, and predictive validity.
methodsThis prospective study consists of three phases: Phase 1 (baseline, during sick leave) was conducted to evaluate construct validity, Phase 2 (2 weeks later) assessed test-retest reliability, and Phase 3 (6-month follow-up, RTW or not) aimed to evaluate predictive validity. A total of 153 BC survivors participated in Phase 1 of the study, where they completed the 10 dimensions of the ROSES (e.g., fear of relapse, cognitive difficulties). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), Pearson correlations, and Cox regressions were performed, with respect to each phase.
resultsThe mean duration for RTW with the same employer was 62.7 weeks. CFAs confirmed the ROSES structure, which had previously been established for other health conditions, showing satisfactory coefficients. Significant Pearson correlation coefficients were observed between the ROSES dimensions from Phase 1 to Phase 2, ranging from 0.66 to 0.88. When considering various confounding variables, chemotherapy treatment and cognitive difficulties (ROSES dimension) emerged as the only significant predictors of RTW.
conclusionThese findings support the utilization of the ROSES in clinical and research settings for BC survivors to improve their successful RTW. After an initial screening using the ROSES, occupational health professionals can further conduct a focused and thorough evaluation of specific dimensions, such as cognitive difficulties. Additional research and information are required to assist BC survivors in dealing with cognitive impairments induced by chemotherapy when they return to work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38311709What 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.