↓ Skip to main content

Workers with a chronic disease and work disability

Overview of attention for article published in Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
Title
Workers with a chronic disease and work disability
Published in
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, March 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00103-012-1621-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

I. Varekamp, F.J.H. van Dijk, L.E. Kroll

Abstract

The prevalence of chronic diseases in the age group 18-65 years is high. Cardiometabolic conditions and musculoskeletal diseases are the most frequent chronic diseases. Depending on disease and comorbidity, the employment rates are considerably lower than for healthy individuals. Chronically ill workers may have problems in meeting job demands, they may experience physical, cognitive or sensory limitations, have fatigue or pain complaints or other disease symptoms. Psychological distress, depressive feelings, feelings of shame or guilt, lack of coping or communicative skills, and non-supportive colleagues and supervisors may add to work-related problems. The ICF Model (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health) of the WHO offers a framework for understanding and considering health-related problems at work and finding solutions. Interventions to prevent problems in functioning, sickness absence and work disability may focus on the worker, the workplace, or health care. Multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation, exercise therapy, cognitive behavioural interventions, workplace interventions and empowerment are interventions with at least some evidence of effectiveness. Future policy could focus more on promotion of workers' health and future research should include the interests and motivations of employers concerning disability management, skills of line managers, the feasibility of interventions to prevent work disability and the context sensitivity of study outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Unknown 141 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 17%
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 25 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 20%
Psychology 24 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 15%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 30 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 March 2013.
All research outputs
#18,331,227
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#730
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,552
of 194,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 194,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.