SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2026
The Impact of Prostate Cancer Treatment on Work Participation: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeProstate cancer is the most common cancer amongst men, yet how its treatment affects work participation remains poorly understood. This systematic review synthesised quantitative evidence on work participation following prostate cancer treatment, comparing treatments and identifying associated factors and evidence gaps.
methodsFive databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Google Scholar) were searched (May 2025) for English-language, peer-reviewed articles reporting treatment-specific work outcomes amongst men with prostate cancer. The review followed PRISMA and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251061347). Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute tools, and certainty of evidence using GRADE.
resultsTwenty-eight articles (24 studies, 39,966 men) were included. Most were cohort (n = 15) or cross-sectional (n = 6) studies; 15 compared ≥ 2 treatments. Median time to return to work (RTW) ranged from 14 to 56 days. Amongst low risk of bias studies reporting adjusted estimates, RTW was faster (adjusted hazard ratio 2.13, 95%CI 1.62-2.80) and long-term absenteeism less likely (adjusted odds ratio 0.53, 95%CI 0.42-0.68) after robot-assisted than open radical prostatectomy. Absenteeism ranged from < 14 to > 50 days and was longer with advanced disease and physically demanding work. The only randomised trial found no RTW difference between treatments (p = 0.49). No studies evaluated outcomes by occupation. Most used self-reported measures with limited confounder adjustment.
conclusionVery low-certainty evidence suggests that work participation after prostate cancer treatment varies by treatment type and disease severity, although heterogeneity and methodological limitations constrain interpretation. Standardised, validated measures and adequate confounder adjustment are needed to inform treatment decisions, survivorship care, and workplace support.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42446789What 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.