Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33765993›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Supporting employees with chronic conditions to stay at work: perspectives of occupational health professionals and organizational representatives.

A R Bosma, C R L Boot, N C Snippen, F G Schaafsma, J R Anema

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Workplace Accommodations for Nurses Who Experience Disabilities: A Scoping Review.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Exploring the working conditions of disabled employees: a scoping review.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A R BosmaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. a.bosma@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-3776-3215
C R L BootDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
N C SnippenDepartment of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
F G SchaafsmaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J R AnemaDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

Instituut Gak 2016 - 756
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSupporting employees with chronic conditions can prevent work-related problems and facilitate sustainable employment. Various stakeholders are involved in providing support to these employees. Understanding their current practices and experienced barriers is useful for the development of an organizational-level intervention to improve this support. The aim of this study was to explore the current practices of occupational physicians and organizational representatives, identifying both barriers to providing support and opportunities for improvement.

methodsTwo focus groups with sixteen occupational physicians and seven semi-structured interviews with organizational representatives were held between January and June 2018. Data was analyzed using thematic content analysis.

resultsSeveral barriers to offer support were identified, including barriers at the organizational level (negative organizational attitudes towards employees with chronic conditions), the employee level (employees' reluctance to collaborate with employers in dealing with work-related problems), and in the collaboration between occupational physicians and organizational representatives. In addition, barriers in occupational health care were described, e.g. occupational physicians' lack of visibility and a lack of utilization of occupational physicians' support. Opportunities to optimize support included a shared responsibility of all stakeholders involved, actively anchoring prevention of work-related problems in policy and practice and a more pronounced role of the health care sector in preventing work-related problems.

conclusionsPreventing work-related problems for employees with chronic conditions can be achieved by addressing the identified barriers to provide support. In addition, both occupational physicians and organizational representatives should initiate and secure preventive support at the organizational level and in occupational health care. These insights are helpful in developing an intervention aimed at supporting employees with chronic conditions to stay at work.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthChronic DiseaseEmploymentHumansQualitative ResearchWorkplaceChronic diseaseOccupational health servicesOrganizationsPreventionQualitative researchWork

Identifiers

PMID33765993
PMCPMC7992826
OpenAlexW3139010290

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.