Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39052178›Full record

SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2025

Patients' Needs Regarding Work-Focused Healthcare: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.

Marije E Hagendijk, Nina Zipfel, Marijke Melles, Philip J van der Wees, Carel T J Hulshof, Elmi Zwaan, Sylvia J van der Burg-Vermeulen, Jan L Hoving

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Marije E HagendijkDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.e.hagendijk@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2311-9528
Nina ZipfelDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marijke MellesFaculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
Philip J van der WeesScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Carel T J HulshofDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Elmi ZwaanDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sylvia J van der Burg-VermeulenDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan L HovingDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Instituut Gak 2018-977
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify, appraise, and synthesize qualitative research evidence exploring patients' needs regarding work-focused healthcare.

methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement guidelines to identify studies reporting patients' needs regarding work-focused healthcare. Four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo and Web of Science) were systematically searched from January 2000 until May 2023 and screened in duplicate by pairs of two reviewers. Inclusion criteria were qualitative data collection method, and patients' perspectives regarding healthcare focusing on work when experiencing work-related problems due to chronic medical conditions. Data extraction and synthesis was executed by means of an inductive thematic analysis approach. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CASP Qualitative Study checklist. Confidence in the review findings was assessed through the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach.

resultsOut of 23,677 records, 97 qualitative studies were included. Needs regarding four main themes were identified: (1) Substantive guidance, which comprises the specific content of work-focused healthcare; (2) Clear and continuous process, which comprises clarification and optimization of the work-focused healthcare process; (3) Supportive attitude and behavior, which comprises a positive and supportive attitude and behavior from professionals towards the patients; and (4) Tailored approach, which comprises the delivery of tailored care to the individuals' needs. 17 subthemes were identified.

conclusionThe broader insight in patients' needs in work-focused healthcare can help (occupational) healthcare professionals adopt a more patient-centred approach in practice.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthPatient-Centered CareHumansQualitative ResearchChronic diseaseDelivery of healthcareOccupational healthQualitative researchReturn to workSick-leaveSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39052178
PMCPMC12361345

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.