ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2026
Process Evaluation of a Problem-Solving Intervention with Workplace Involvement for Employees on Sickness Absence Due to Common Mental Disorders in Swedish Primary Health Care.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03346395 (A Problem Solving Based Intervention in Primary Health Care for Facilitating Return-to-work Among People Suffering From Common Mental Disorders - a Cluster-randomized Trial), which is not on this 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.
A Problem Solving Based Intervention in Primary Health Care for Facilitating Return-to-work Among People Suffering From Common Mental Disorders - a Cluster-randomized Trial
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis process evaluation examined the implementation of a problem-solving intervention with workplace involvement (PSI-WPI) for employees with common mental disorders, developed to reduce sickness absence. The aim was to understand factors influencing the "problem-solving in primary care" (PROSA) effect evaluation, which showed no significant difference in sickness absence days between PSI-WPI and care-as-usual (CAU).
methodsPSI-WPI included a five-step process typically delivered over three sessions by primary care rehabilitation coordinators. Process outcomes assessed were reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity and dose response. Data came from questionnaires, medical records, and registry data. Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed associations between number of PSI-WPI sessions and sickness absence days. A post hoc analysis explored characteristics of employees receiving no, one or ≥ three PSI-WPI sessions.
resultsPSI-WPI coordinators reported slightly more face-to-face sessions and three-part meetings, whereas CAU coordinators reported more telephone sessions. Coordinator support was received by 85% of PSI-WPI participants compared to 43% of CAU; 41% PSI-WPI participants received ≥ three sessions. Employees receiving ≥ three sessions had significantly more sickness absence days during 18-months follow-up than those receiving none.
conclusionThe intervention was largely delivered as intended and supported by sufficient training and resources. Dose-response findings suggest the intervention was primarily delivered to employees with more complex needs, highlighting the importance of accounting for preintervention sickness absence and targeting support. Future studies should strengthen implementation planning, refine theoretical assumptions, and ensure alignment between intervention design and participant needs, particularly when adapting return-to-work interventions from occupational health services to primary health care. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03346395 on January 12th, 2018.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42541653What 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.