CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Workplace Health and Well-beingMedical Practices and RehabilitationRetirement, Disability, and Employment

Expectations and illness perceptions as predictors of benefit recipiency among workers with common mental disorders: secondary analysis from a randomised controlled trial

Open access
Løvvik, Camilla, Shaw, William, Øverland, Simon, Reme, Silje Endresen·2014·BMJ Open
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004321PMC PMC3948454
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Common mental disorders (CMDs) are among the leading causes of sick leave, and more knowledge on factors related to work participation and return-to-work (RTW) in CMDs is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate RTW-expectations and illness perceptions as predictors of benefit recipiency in CMDs. DESIGN: Study participants were enrolled in a randomised controlled trial and reported CMDs as a main obstacle for work participation. Three prespecified subgroups were included: people at risk of going on sick leave, people on sick leave (>3 weeks) or people on long-term benefits. Baseline questionnaire data and registry data at baseline and 6 months were used to investigate predictors of benefit recipiency at 6-month follow-up. Benefit recipiency included sickness benefits, disability pension, work assessment allowance and unemployment benefits. RESULTS: In this study, uncertain and negative RTW-expectations were strong predictors of benefit recipiency at 6 months follow-up. Illness perceptions predicted benefit recipiency in the unadjusted model, but not in the fully adjusted model. In the subgroup on sick leave, uncertain and negative RTW-expectations predicted benefit recipiency, while in the subgroup of people at risk of going on sick leave, negative RTW-expectations predicted benefit recipiency. In the subgroup on long-term benefits, only female gender predicted benefit recipiency. CONCLUSIONS: For people with CMDs, uncertain and negative RTW-expectations predict later benefit recipiency, and expectations seem particularly important for those at risk of or on sick leave. For those at risk of sick leave, benefit recipiency at follow-up denoted a transition onto sick leave or long-term benefit, while those on sick leave had remained so or were receiving long-term benefits. Addressing RTW-expectations in occupational healthcare services or vocational rehabilitation might be beneficial in early stages or even prior to a sick leave episode. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01146730.

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 · 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004321

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • The single item measure of return-to-work expectations has been demonstrated to be a strong predictor of non-return-to-work in populations with similarities to the current study, such as people on sick leave due to chronic low back pain and people struggling with work participation due to common mental disorders.

    “This single item measure of RTW-expectations has been demonstrated to be a strong predictor of non-RTW in populations with similarities to the current, such as people on sick leave due to chronic low back pain [88], and people struggling with work participation due to common mental disorders [86].”

    From Pre- and post-operative psychological interventions to prevent pain and fatigue after breast cancer surgery (PREVENT): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (2022) · cites this paper as [86]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Løvvik, C., Shaw, W., Øverland, S., & Reme, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Uni Research (Norway) (NO)
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
Corresponding author
Løvvik, Camilla
ORCID
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-03
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
e004321
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004321
PMC
PMC3948454
OpenAlex
W2140476159
Cited by
39
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 3
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • BIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) (submittedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
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
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Retirement, Disability, and Employment
Keywords
common mental disorders, illness perception, sick leave, long-term benefits, disability pension, work participation, occupational health services, vocational rehabilitation, gender differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude, Mental Disorders, Employment, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pensions, Perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk, Work, Sick Leave, Self Efficacy, 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