ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2024
Work participation and the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study in people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and population controls.
Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2024. 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.
- A Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation of the Maastricht Work-Related Support Intervention for Healthcare Professionals in Clinical Care.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (iRDs) might have been more vulnerable for adverse work outcomes (AWOs) and restrictions in work ability and work performance. Our objectives were to compare AWOs during the pandemic and current work ability between iRD patients and controls, understand which patients are most vulnerable for these outcomes and (3) explore the role of work characteristics on work performance while working remotely. Methods: Patients and population controls in a Dutch COVID-19 cohort study provided information in March 2022 on work participation in March 2020 (pre-pandemic, retrospective) and March 2022 (current). AWOs comprised withdrawal from paid work, working hours reduction or long-term sick leave. Multivariable logistic/linear regression analyses compared outcomes (AWOs/work ability) between groups (patients/controls) and within patients. Results: Of the pre-pandemic working participants, 227/977 (23%) patients and 79/430 (18%) controls experienced AWOs following pandemic onset. A minority of AWOs (15%) were attributed to COVID-19. Patients were more likely to experience any-cause AWOs (odds ratio range 1.63-3.34) but not COVID-related AWOs, with female patients and patients with comorbidities or physically demanding jobs being most vulnerable. Current work ability was lower in female patients compared with controls [β = -0.66 (95% CI -0.92 to -0.40)]. In both groups, when working remotely, care for children and absence of colleagues had varying effects on work performance (positive 19% and 24%, negative 34% and 57%, respectively), while employer support and reduced commuting had mainly positive effects (83% and 86%, respectively). Conclusion: During the pandemic, people with iRDs remained at increased risk of AWOs. COVID-related AWOs, however, were infrequent.
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.