Cited by 27Digital Mental Health InterventionsWorkplace Health and Well-beingOccupational Health and Burnout

Improving Work Functioning and Mental Health of Health Care Employees Using an E-Mental Health Approach to Workers’ Health Surveillance: Pretest-Posttest Study

Open access
Ketelaar, Sarah M., Nieuwenhuijsen, Karen, Bolier, Linda, Smeets, Odile, Sluiter, Judith K.·2014·Safety and Health at Work

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mental health complaints are quite common in health care employees and can have adverse effects on work functioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate an e-mental health (EMH) approach to workers' health surveillance (WHS) for nurses and allied health professionals. Using the waiting-list group of a previous randomized controlled trial with high dropout and low compliance to the intervention, we studied the pre- and posteffects of the EMH approach in a larger group of participants. METHODS: We applied a pretest-posttest study design. The WHS consisted of online screening on impaired work functioning and mental health followed by online automatically generated personalized feedback, online tailored advice, and access to self-help EMH interventions. The effects on work functioning, stress, and work-related fatigue after 3 months were analyzed using paired t tests and effect sizes. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight nurses and allied health professionals participated at pretest as well as posttest. Significant improvements were found on work functioning (p = 0.01) and work-related fatigue (p < 0.01). Work functioning had relevantly improved in 30% of participants. A small meaningful effect on stress was found (Cohen d = .23) in the participants who had logged onto an EMH intervention (20%, n = 26). CONCLUSION: The EMH approach to WHS improves the work functioning and mental health of nurses and allied health professionals. However, because we found small effects and participation in the offered EMH interventions was low, there is ample room for improvement.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.shaw.2014.08.002

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ketelaar, S. M., Nieuwenhuijsen, K., Bolier, L., Smeets, O., & Sluiter, J. K.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Trimbos Institute (NL)
Corresponding author
Ketelaar, Sarah M.
Venue
Safety and Health at Work
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
216-221
ISSN
2093-7911 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2152185521
Cited by
27
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Safety and Health at Work (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Funders
The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (208010001)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
Keywords
e-mental health, occupational health surveillance, mental health, work functioning, nurses, allied health professionals, occupational fatigue, occupational stress, online screening, personalized feedback, tailored advice, self-help intervention, healthcare workers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review