Health Status, Its Perceptions, and Effect on Return to Work and Recurrent Sick Leave
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with 1-year follow-up. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to describe the improvement in several health outcomes during sick leave resulting from musculoskeletal disorders and in the first months after return to work (RTW), and to evaluate the personal and work-related factors associated with these health outcomes, in order to provide some insight in the timing of RTW. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although improvements in pain perception and functional disability appear to be associated with time of RTW, little is known about the required improvement enabling RTW, the additional health improvement after RTW, and whether the health status at the time of RTW is associated with the probability of a recurrence of sick leave. METHODS: Workers were included when on sickness absence between 2 to 6 weeks due to musculoskeletal disorders. Self-administered questionnaires at baseline, after RTW, and at 12-month follow-up were used to collect information on changes in symptom status, functional status, and general health. RESULTS: All health outcomes were improved significantly at the time of RTW, whereas perceived pain, functional disability, and physical health also improved significantly in the first months after RTW. Previous sick leave 12 months before study entry was significantly associated with the level of functional disability and general health at time of RTW and also predictive for recurrence of sickness absence. Personal and work-related factors showed little, if any, association with health status at RTW and improvement thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Being fully recovered is not a stipulation for regaining work activities. We hypothesize that workers with musculoskeletal disorders may need additional medical guidance shortly after RTW, especially those with a history of sick leave.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".