Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34353286›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2021

Rehabilitation interventions to support return to work for women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Naomi Algeo, Kathleen Bennett, Deirdre Connolly

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Non-medical interventions to enhance return to work for people with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A multidisciplinary intervention to support return to work of individuals with breast cancer: a prospective feasibility study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer work after cancer global challenges and solutions white paper: key findings and recommendations.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Utilization outcomes of a cancer rehabilitation (CRNav) program: getting to the quadruple aim in cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Naomi AlgeoDiscipline of Occupational Therapy, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. nalgeo@tcd.ie.
Kathleen BennettData Science Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Deirdre ConnollyDiscipline of Occupational Therapy, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Trinity College Dublin · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch recommends the development and evaluation of interventions to support women with breast cancer in returning to, or managing, work. Despite this, there has historically been a paucity of rehabilitation interventions to support women with breast cancer to maintain or return to their work role. The aim of this systematic review was to examine key characteristics of rehabilitation interventions, and their effectiveness on work outcomes for women with breast cancer, compared to usual care.

methodsA systematic review was conducted of controlled studies of rehabilitation interventions with work outcomes for women with breast cancer. Six databases were systematically searched: EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Results are presented either as pooled odds ratio (OR) or pooled effect size (hedges g) between groups, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Narrative synthesis was conducted on intervention outcomes not suitable for meta-analysis.

resultsFive thousand, five hundred and thirty-five studies were identified. Nine out of 28 abstracts met inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Of the interventions included in meta-analysis, no significant differences compared to usual care were found for sick leave (2 studies (12 months); OR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.87), number of sick days taken (2 studies (six months); difference in effect: - 0.08, (95% CI: - 0.48 to 0.38) or working hours (2 studies (12 months); 0.19, (95% CI: - 0.20 to 0.64). Only one study, with a multidisciplinary intervention, showed a significant difference for work outcomes when compared to usual care. Work-specific content featured in three interventions only, none of which provided conclusive evidence for improvement in work outcomes. Enhanced physical and psychological sequalae, and quality of life was observed in some studies.

conclusionThere remains a lack of effective and methodologically rigorous rehabilitation intervention studies for breast cancer survivors. The development and evaluation of effective rehabilitation interventions to support return to work is warranted.

Indexed as

Return to WorkActivities of Daily LivingAdolescentAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsEmploymentFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPublication BiasQuality of LifeSick LeaveYoung Adultactivities of daily livingbreast neoplasmsEmploymentQuality of lifesurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID34353286
PMCPMC8340442
OpenAlexW3135522054

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.