Cited by 8Workplace Health and Well-beingMedical Practices and RehabilitationMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Predictors of self-efficacy in women on long-term sick leave

Andersén, Åsa, Larsson, Kjerstin, Lytsy, Per, Kristiansson, Per, Anderzén, Ingrid·2015·International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

Abstract

Self-efficacy has been shown to be related to sick leave and to be a predictor of return to work after sickness absence. The aim of this study was to investigate whether factors related to sick leave predict self-efficacy in women on long-term sick leave because of pain and/or mental illness. This cross-sectional study uses baseline data from 337 Swedish women with pain and/or mental illness. All included women took part in vocational rehabilitation. Data were collected through a sick leave register and a baseline questionnaire. General self-efficacy, sociodemographics, self-rated health, anxiety, depression, view of the future, and social support were measured and analyzed by univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses. The full multivariate linear regression model, which included mental health factors together with all measured factors, showed that anxiety and depression were the only predictive factors of lower self-efficacy (adjusted R2=0.46, P<0.001) and explained 46% of the variance in self-efficacy. The mean scores of general self-efficacy were low, especially in women born abroad, those with low motivation, those with uncertainties about returning to work, and women reporting distrust. Anxiety and depression are important factors to consider when targeting self-efficacy in vocational rehabilitation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mrr.0000000000000129

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andersén, Å., Larsson, K., Lytsy, P., Kristiansson, P., & Anderzén, I.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Andersén, Åsa
Venue
International Journal of Rehabilitation Research
Published
2015-12
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
320-326
ISSN
0342-5282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2474287772
Cited by
8
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Rehabilitation Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Socialdepartementet
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
self-efficacy, long-term sick leave, women, pain, mental illness, anxiety, depression, vocational rehabilitation, return to work, social support, self-rated health, motivation, distrust
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rehabilitation, Vocational, Social Support, Sweden, Sick Leave, Self Efficacy, Young Adult, Chronic Pain, Return to Work

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