Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42819518›Full record

ArticleJournal of health monitoring2026

Socioeconomic differences in return to work after oncological rehabilitation: An analysis using data from German Pension Insurance.

Enno Nowossadeck, Fabian Tetzlaff, Juliane Tetzlaff, Benjamin Barnes, Jens Hoebel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health monitoring, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Enno NowossadeckRobert Koch Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany.
Fabian TetzlaffRobert Koch Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany.
Juliane TetzlaffHannover Medical School, Medical Sociology Research and Teaching Unit, Hannover, Germany.
Benjamin BarnesRobert Koch Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany.
Jens HoebelRobert Koch Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: When employed people cannot return to work after cancer treatment, loss of income and social contacts are among the potentially precarious consequences of the disease. This article examines whether people from socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are less likely to return to work after oncological rehabilitation than people from more advantaged groups. Methods: The data source was the Scientific Use File 'Completed rehabilitation in the insurance history' of German Pension Insurance for 2014 - 2021. The analysis considered formal educational attainment, occupational skill level and income before rehabilitation as socioeconomic characteristics. Successful return to work was defined as being in employment for at least 50 % of weekly working hours 24 months after rehabilitation. Cox proportional hazards regression models, stratified by sex, were fitted. Results: Two years after rehabilitation, 67.2 % of people with cancer were in employment (women 70.0 %, men 63.4 %). In particular, people with lower incomes were less likely to return to work than people with higher incomes, even after controlling for other variables such as age and region of residence. Conclusions: There are socioeconomic inequalities in return to work following oncological rehabilitation, particularly to the disadvantage of people in low-income groups.

Indexed as

GermanyHealth inequalitiesPension insuranceRehabilitationReturn to workWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID42819518
PMCPMC13626025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.