ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on the associations between short rest periods between shifts and health, function, and behavioral outcomes.
Article in Systematic reviews, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis paper presents a protocol for a planned systematic review and meta-analysis that will investigate the impact of short rest periods between shifts (i.e., quick returns, <11 h rest) on various outcomes in terms of physical health of workers (e.g., cardiovascular disease, infections, headaches, back pain) and/or mental health of workers (e.g., anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep problems, insomnia, impaired mental health), as well as sickness absence (proxy of health), work performance (e.g., occupational accidents), social factors (e.g., social support), and psychosocial work-related factors (e.g., job satisfaction). The planned review further aims to identify different types of quick returns, such as evening to day shift and night to evening shift, and examine their relationship to these outcomes provided a sufficient number of studies (e.g., ≥5). The research will identify demographic and methodological factors that may moderate the relationship between quick returns and the specified outcomes.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis will be carried out. Predefined search terms for short rest between consecutive shifts will be developed and employed to identify relevant studies examining quick returns and all aforementioned outcomes. The databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsychInfo, EMBASE, ProQuest, BASE, and Cochrane Trials and the 200 first hits in Google Scholar will be searched up to April 2026. Two reviewers will independently screen identified records and assess eligible full texts for inclusions. The risk-of-bias of included studies will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed study reviews. A random effects meta-analytic synthesis will be conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. The primary measure of effect size will be odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity will be evaluated using Cochran's Q test and the I DISCUSSION: This planned systematic review and meta-analysis will be the first to synthesize the current evidence systematically and quantitatively regarding the consequences of quick returns, including demographic and methodological moderators. Aggregation of the existing evidence will improve our understanding of the consequences of quick returns and, as such, provide directions for practitioners in terms of possible preventive initiatives and work environment improvements. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024533607.
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.