ReviewJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2025
Collaboration between occupational health services and other health care: a scoping review.
Review in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOccupational health services play an important role in supporting employees' work ability and co-ordinating rehabilitation processes. However, they may operate quite separately from other health care systems, and the level of the collaboration between occupational health services and other health care varies across different countries. We aimed to evaluate how the co-operation between occupational health care and other health care providers has been studied.
methodsThis study was a scoping review. The literature search examined the databases of Scopus, Ovid Medline and Cinahl for original studies of collaboration between occupational health services and other social and health services from 2012 to 2022. The articles were evaluated on the basis of actor and form of collaboration.
resultsOut of the 1008 articles we found, 26 articles met our inclusion criteria. After searching the reference lists of the included articles, we chose seven more articles, resulting in a total of 33 articles for our scoping review. The articles were categorized according to the main actors of collaboration into seven groups: (1) collaboration between occupational health physicians (OP) and general physicians, (2) collaboration between OPs and rehabilitation physicians, (3) collaboration between OPs and psychotherapists, (4) collaboration between occupational health physiotherapists and general physiotherapists, (5) collaboration between occupational health professionals (OHP) and general health professionals, (6) collaboration between OHPs and specialized health care professionals and (7) collaboration between OHPs and other work-related stakeholders.
conclusionsThe existing research on the collaboration between occupational health services and other health care appears to be mostly descriptive, highlighting the need for intervention studies of collaboration models.
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.