MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110342465 · doi:10.7202/1073530ar

Dilemmes des médecins traitants lors du retour au travail de personnes aux prises avec un trouble mental courant : illustration par des vignettes cliniques

2020· article· fr· W3110342465 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fabienne Boileau-Falardeau, Jean-Robert Turcotte, Paul-André Lafleur, Marc Corbière

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté mentale au Québec · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecUniversité du Québec à MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Common mental disorders (CMD) are one of the leading causes of workplace disability worldwide. Many studies show that the longer a person is on sick leave, the less likely they are returning to work. It is therefore important that the duration of a work absence be an adequate duration to allow the individual to make a lasting recovery while reducing the risk of relapse. Clinicians have an important role to play in the professional recovery of people with CMD. Purpose The main objective of this article is to present clinical cases supported by the literature related to the management of return to work by clinicians treating their patients with CMD. Methods Based on clinical observations, three clinical cases illustrating several dilemmas that clinicians may encounter when managing return to work of their patients with a CMD are presented. These dilemmas are supported by articles published between 2000 and 2020 from the Medline and PsycInfo databases. Results and discussion Three clinical cases address dilemmas related to the following themes: 1) the assessment of the therapeutic potential of work absence, 2) the expert role given to clinicians and the process of assessing work disability, 3) the administrative aspects related to this assessment and 4) the impact of this assessment on therapeutic alliance between the clinician and his/her patient with CMD. The literature tells us that these are recurring dilemmas for clinicians when managing the return to work of their patients with CMD. Conclusions There are several dilemmas in the management of sick leave among workers with CMD by clinicians. These dilemmas highlight, among other things, the importance for clinicians to work collaboratively with other stakeholders and to obtain their support and collaboration. These observations lead us to conduct a more systematic review of the experience of clinicians and their needs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté mentale au QuébecSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207