↓ Skip to main content

Interventions Developed with the Intervention Mapping Protocol in Work Disability Prevention: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Interventions Developed with the Intervention Mapping Protocol in Work Disability Prevention: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Published in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10926-018-9776-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. B. Fassier, P. Sarnin, S. Rouat, J. Péron, G. Kok, L. Letrilliart, M. Lamort-Bouché

Abstract

Purposes Intervention mapping (IM) is a protocol for developing effective behavior change interventions. It has been used for 10 years to develop work disability prevention (WDP) interventions, but it is not known to what extent and with what success. The main objective of this study was to review the effectiveness of these interventions. Secondary objectives were to review their fidelity to the IM protocol, their theoretical frameworks and their content. Methods A search strategy was conducted in MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Pascal, Francis, and BDSP. All titles and abstracts were reviewed. A standardized extraction form was developed. All included studies were reviewed by two reviewers blinded to each other. Results Eight WDP interventions were identified aimed at return to work (RTW; n = 6) and self-management at work (n = 2). RTW interventions targeted workers with stress-related mental disorders (n = 1), low back pain (n = 1), musculoskeletal disorders (n = 1), cancer (n = 2) and gynecological surgery (n = 1). The fidelity to the IM protocol was weaker for the participatory planning group. Matrices of change, change methods, and applications were systematically reported. The main theoretical frameworks used were the attitude-social influence-self efficacy model (n = 4) and the theory of planned behavior (n = 2). Half of the interventions included a workplace component (n = 4). Two interventions were reported as effective, and one partially effective. Conclusion The IM protocol is used in WDP since 2007. The participative dimension appears underused. Few theoretical frameworks were used. Implications are to better consider the stakeholders involvement, and mobilize theoretical frameworks with greater attempts to intervene on the work environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 122 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Master 12 10%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 51 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 11%
Psychology 9 7%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 60 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 03 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,084,443
of 25,089,705 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
#57
of 659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,399
of 334,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,089,705 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 334,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.