↓ Skip to main content

The capacity to work puzzle: a qualitative study of physicians’ assessments for patients with common mental disorders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
The capacity to work puzzle: a qualitative study of physicians’ assessments for patients with common mental disorders
Published in
BMC Primary Care, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0815-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica Bertilsson, Silje Maeland, Jesper Löve, Gunnar Ahlborg, Erik L. Werner, Gunnel Hensing

Abstract

Entitlement to sickness benefits is a legal process requiring health-related reduced work capacity confirmed by a physician via a sickness certificate. However, there is a knowledge gap concerning physicians' clinical practice of work capacity assessments for patients with common mental disorders (CMD). Physicians claim more knowledge and skills in how to actually do the assessments. The aim of this study was to explore physicians' tacit knowledge of performing assessments of capacity to work and the need for sickness absence in patients with depression and anxiety disorders. We performed a qualitative study with open-ended interviews and a short video vignette of a physician and a patient with depression as stimuli. Participating physicians (n = 24) were specialized in general practice, occupational health or psychiatry and experienced in treating patients with depression and anxiety. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive content analysis was used as the analytical tool. Five categories were identified. Category 1 identified work capacity assessment as doing a jigsaw puzzle without any master model. The physicians both identified and created the pieces of the puzzle, mainly by facilitating strategies to make the patient a better supplier of essential information. The finished puzzle made up a highly individualized comprehensive picture required for adequate assessment. Categories 2-4 identified the particular essential pieces of information the participants used, relating to the patient's disorder, capacity in the work place and contextual everyday life. For the sickness absence assessment, apart from decreased work capacity, the physicians also took particulars of the work place into account; e.g. could the work place handle an employee with reduced capacity. Physicians' tacit knowledge of assessing work capacity and the need for sickness absence for patients with CMD was identified as doing a jigsaw puzzle. The physicians became identifiers and creators of the pieces of the puzzle using a broad palette of essential information. Our findings contribute to the knowledge gap on clinical assessment and can be used as an educational tool. Because they are based on the professions' tacit knowledge, acceptance of the model can be expected to be high.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 21 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Unspecified 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 22 39%
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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,714
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,767
of 340,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#47
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 340,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.