ArticlePloS one2026
Modelling the risk of professional disengagement from a cohort study of 181,676 workers in the south of France.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study determines a set of medical, occupational, and social risk factors of professional disengagement that can be documented early in occupational health practice.
methodThis study was carried out on a cohort of French workers. Data were extracted from computerised occupational health medical follow up records. The professional disengagement risk was assessed by healthcare professionals. Logistic regression models were applied.
results181,676 workers were included. Of these, 4.05% had a high professional disengagement risk index (PDRI) and 13.0% a moderate risk. Women (OR: 1.21) and 50-61-year-old (OR: 5.17) workers appear to be the most at high risk. White-collar (OR: 1.63) and blue-collar (OR: 1.60) have a higher at risk compared with manager. The main disorder risk factors of high PDRI were mental disorders (OR: 8.79), musculoskeletal disorders including shoulder (OR: 6.23), arm (OR: 3.80), or hand (OR: 3.21) and kidney disorders (OR: 5.57). Recognition of a professional disengagement (OR: 7.55) or long/iterative sick leave (OR: 5.08) is associated with high PDRI. Occupational exposure associated with high PDRI include "poor interpersonal relationships" (OR: 6.05), "job insecurity" (OR: 4.14) and "conflicts of values" (OR: 3.88). Exposure to noise (OR: 1.33) and heavy work (OR: 1.25) are associated with a high PDRI, however some physical exposures appear to be 'protective' such as lower limb postures (OR: 0.68) or whole-body vibrations (OR: 0.64).
conclusionsMental and musculoskeletal disorders, poor working relationships, job insecurity and conflicts of values all appear to be avoidable risk factors for professional disengagement These results reinforce the importance of targeted prevention and orientates future research to refine the accuracy of the variables and better distinguish gradients and thresholds of risk. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Numerous studies have investigated the factors facilitating or limiting a return to work after professional disengagement. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study highlights the medical and professional factors which should be early documented to prevent professional disengagement.
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.