ArticleBMC health services research2026
Feasibility study of a revised intervention for addressing student sickness absence: a qualitative evaluation.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the Netherlands, Youth Health Care (YHC) physicians expanded upon the implementation of the Medical Advice for Sick-reported Students (MASS) intervention by introducing a MASS YHC procedure involving a multidisciplinary team. This study examines the feasibility of the revised intervention.
methodsThe study was conducted between September 2023 and June 2024. Qualitative data were gathered using 10 homogeneous focus groups with 42 key users (25 YHC and 17 school professionals). The study was guided by the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations framework using deductive thematic analysis in Atlas.ti.
findingsThe revised MASS YHC procedure was well understood once its changes were clarified. School and YHC professionals reported that allocating care and requesting absence consultations following a school's Care Advisory Team meeting had become more streamlined. New information materials supported the communication with parents and colleagues. School professionals generally accepted the procedural adjustments but questioned the added value of jointly assigning care with parents and involving non-physician YHC disciplines in absence consultations; they felt capable of selecting YHC disciplines themselves. According to YHC professionals, calling parents to assign care and schedule consultations reduced no-shows and made absence consultations smoother and more effective. When absence consultations involved students who were not enrolled at the YHC professional's affiliated school, communication within the YHC and with school professionals became more challenging. Most YHC professionals valued the multidisciplinary case discussions for enhancing advisory plans through diverse insights and shared experiences, which also fostered job satisfaction and a sense of shared responsibility. However, some YHC physicians viewed team meetings as a means of oversight rather than support. All professionals considered the focus group sessions to be helpful for staying informed about the implementation progress, exchanging barriers and success factors, and clarifying the reasoning behind adjustments.
conclusionsThe MASS YHC procedure was well-equipped for implementation following process refinement and the development of support materials. Parental involvement in care allocation was perceived to reduce no-shows and smoothen absence consultations. Multidisciplinary case discussions were perceived to enhance knowledge and job satisfaction. Ongoing, guided implementation with evaluation is crucial to prevent implementation failure due to local adaptations or misinterpretations.
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.