Trial reportBMC psychiatry2026
Disclosure of mental illness towards employers during the return to work process after psychiatric hospitalization.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor people returning to the workplace after a leave of absence due to a mental illness the decision whether or not to disclose their mental illness is influenced by multiple factors. As part of the RETURN study, that surveyed in-patients with mental disorders in acute psychiatric wards, it was our aim in this secondary analysis to examine the effects of a return-to-work intervention on the disclosure process of employees returning back to their existing workplace after a leave of absence due to a mental illness.
methodsThis study, as part of RETURN, is a multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled trial. Patients were recruited in acute psychiatric wards with randomization at cluster level. Patients in the intervention wards received support from a case manager in their return-to-work process, while patients in the control wards received treatment as usual. Following measures were assessed: self-stigma, stigma stress, decisional conflict as well as questions addressing the own strategy regarding disclosure.
resultsA total of 268 patients were recruited, with 137 in the intervention wards and 131 in control wards. No significant differences could be found between intervention and control group with regard to the assessed measures.
conclusionsEven though the results of our study could not confirm an effect of a structured return-to-work intervention on the disclosure process, it provides valuable insights with regard to the complexity and individuality of this topic. Various factors need to be taken into consideration that may have an effect on the disclosure process: possible previous disclosure decisions due to chronic mental illness, the effect of the diagnosis, the impact of psychiatric inpatient treatment on symptomology as well as the understanding of the own mental illness. Nonetheless, a possible positive impact of interventions supporting employees in finding the best possible disclosure decision should not be neglected, as previous research could prove these to be helpful. Our study also provides indications for this.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00016037, registered 21.12.2018.
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.