You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effectiveness of a problem-solving based intervention to prolong the working life of ageing workers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-1410-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wendy Koolhaas, Johan W Groothoff, Michiel R de Boer, Jac JL van der Klink, Sandra Brouwer |
| Abstract |
BackgroundAn ageing workforce combined with increasing health problems in ageing workers implies the importance of evidence-based interventions to enhance sustainable employability. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the `Staying healthy at work¿ problem-solving based intervention compared to business as usual.MethodsThis study was designed as a quasi-experimental trial with a one-year follow-up. Measurements were performed at baseline, three and twelve months. The problem-solving based intervention provides a strategy for increasing the awareness of ageing workers of their role and responsibility in living sustainable, healthy working lives. The primary outcomes were work ability, vitality and productivity. Secondary outcomes were perceived fatigue, psychosocial work characteristics, work attitude, self-efficacy and work engagement.ResultsAnalyses were performed on the 64 workers in the intervention and 61 workers from the business as usual group. No effects on productivity (OR¿=¿0.83, 95% CI 0.23-3.00) and adverse effects on work ability (B¿=¿¿1.33, 95%CI ¿2.45 to ¿0.20) and vitality (OR¿=¿0.10, 95%CI 0.02-0.46) were found. Positive results were found for the work attitude secondary outcome (B¿=¿5.29, 95%CI ¿9.59 to ¿0.99), the self-efficacy persistence subscale (B¿=¿1.45, 95%CI 0.43-2.48) and the skill discretion subscale of the Job Content Questionnaire (B¿=¿1.78, 95%CI 0.74-2.83).ConclusionThe results of the problem-solving intervention showed no positive effects on the three outcome measures compared to business as usual. However, effectiveness was shown on three of the secondary outcome measures, i.e. work attitude, self-efficacy and skill discretion. We presume that the lack of positive effects on primary outcomes is due to programme failure and not to theory failure.Trial registrationThe trial is registered with the Dutch Trial Register under number NTR2270. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 19% |
| Unknown | 33 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 20 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 39 | 35% |
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 04 February 2015.
All research outputs
#16,099,609
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,766
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,494
of 357,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#160
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 357,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.