ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2025
Assessment of Work Ability in People with Musculoskeletal Disorders in Primary Health Care: A Scoping Review of Self-Reported Tools.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2025. 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
purposeMusculoskeletal disorders account for approximately 25% of consultations in primary health care, and sickness absence due to these disorders imposes a substantial economic burden on society. Early identification of workers at risk of sickness absence is crucial; however, there is no consensus on how to identify risk and guide work participation for individuals with musculoskeletal disorders. This scoping review aims to address the research question: Which tools (questionnaires or questions) are used to assess work ability and guide work participation in workers with musculoskeletal disorders, and how do they correspond to the codes in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model?
methodsThrough systematic searches on EMBASE, Medline, Pedro, CINAHL and AMED, we identified tools relevant to assessing work ability in primary health care for use in the early phase of sick leave. Items in the questionnaires were mapped into second level ICF codes.
resultsThe scoping review included 95 studies from an initial pool of 10,800 articles. The studies covered 25 tools, all except two of which were available in English, and ten were available in a Scandinavian language. The diverse evidence base for work ability assessment tools spans various ICF codes, with most questionnaires including items in the activity and participation domains. Few questionnaires addressed environmental and personal factors.
conclusionThe evidence base for work ability assessment tools is extensive, with significant variation in tools, linkage to ICF, and psychometric properties. This scoping review supports healthcare personnel selecting tools based on their purpose, time, body area, and dimensions covered, considering the duration of sickness absence and case complexity. Future research should incorporate environmental and personal factors for comprehensive evaluations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41233626What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.