Cited by 87Medical Practices and RehabilitationWorkplace Health and Well-beingDisability Education and Employment

Motivation and return to work among the long-term sicklisted: an action theory perspective

Berglind, H., Gerner, U.·2002·Disability and Rehabilitation

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to enlighten motivation and return to work among the long-term sicklisted. METHOD: Data are from a mail questionnaire answered by 185 people living in the Stockholm metropolitan area in Sweden. All subjects were on long-term sick leave owing to back or neck symptoms, they were 18-55 years of age and had an employer. A part of the questionnaire was based on an action theory perspective emphasising the respondent's own view of his or her present and future situation. People answered structured questions about what kind of work they wanted, if they thought they could get such work and if they thought they could manage this type of work. All three aspects are of importance in the study of motivation. A follow-up of the employment status of the respondents was made about two years after the questionnaire had been answered. The relationships between their plans and employment status were studied. RESULTS: The results show that our questions had good predictive validity, i.e. there were clear correlations between the answers and employment status two years later. It was shown that wanting to return to work is connected to one's view of own possibilities. What a person wants is not an isolated opinion, but clearly connected with the other aspects, particularly own competence ("can manage"). CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the action theory approach could be developed into an instrument for "action analysis" that could be used in work with vocational rehabilitation. Such a development is now under way.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09638280210124301

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 1 · Cited by 87

Authors
Berglind, H., & Gerner, U.
Affiliations
Stockholm University (SE)
Venue
Disability and Rehabilitation
Published
2002-01
Volume
24
Issue
14
Pages
719-726
ISSN
  • 0963-8288 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5165
OpenAlex
W2153985171
Cited by
87
References
1
Citations by year
2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
9.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Disability and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
Keywords
return to work, long-term sick leave, employee motivation, philosophy of action, action analysis, neck and back pain, perceived competence, vocational rehabilitation, employment status, predictive validity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Employment, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Long-Term Care, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Prospective Studies, Psychological Theory, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rehabilitation, Vocational, Sweden, Time Factors, Sick Leave

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