ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2025
Content validity of the Demand and Ability Protocol - A dialogue tool involving stakeholders in exploring demands and abilities at work.
Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Employees' experiences of involving their managers in the Return-to-Work process through a three-party meeting in primary healthcare - a retrospective interview study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe ICF-based Demand and Ability Protocol (DAP) is a dialogue tool to be used when assessing the balance between an employee's functional ability and the demands of their work and as a supportive measure for discussing work ability, workplace adaptations and return to work. The DAP has been used in Sweden since the twenty-first century, however revision nor content validity has not yet been evaluated.
objectiveTo update and revise the Demand and Ability Protocol and to assess the content validity of the dialogue tool.
methodsA qualitative design was used involving a multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 7) and a group of experienced DAP-users (n = 13) who participated in think-aloud interviews. Data were analyzed with thematic analysis.
resultsSeveral significant changes were made to the domains to enhance the clarity and conciseness of the DAP. Some changes in formulations were identified and changed, even though the questions were mostly perceived as clear and relevant. Overall, the DAP can be considered as a dialogue tool with good content validity.
conclusionThe revision and validation process of the DAP have clarified the theoretical concepts and their link to the ICF, establishing a strong basis for the dialogue tool's content.
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.