Sheel V Singh, Stephen Brumbach Wechsler, Deirdre Connolly, Anna Blythe, Ryley McCarron, Brenna Bigenwald, Areej El-Jawahri, Kathleen Doyle Lyons
{"title":"癌症幸存者重返工作岗位的自我效能:一项范围审查。","authors":"Sheel V Singh, Stephen Brumbach Wechsler, Deirdre Connolly, Anna Blythe, Ryley McCarron, Brenna Bigenwald, Areej El-Jawahri, Kathleen Doyle Lyons","doi":"10.1177/10519815261445913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundWhile enhancing return-to-work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) is known to improve return-to-work (RTW) outcomes in other populations, its conceptualization, measurement, and application within cancer populations remain unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this scoping review is to examine the empirical literature regarding how RTW-SE has been described, measured, and addressed among cancer survivors.Methods<i>Data Sources:</i> Seven databases were searched. In total, 1208 articles were identified and screened by title and abstract. After full-text review, 29 articles were included in the final data extraction and analysis for this scoping review. <i>Data Extraction</i>: Data related to sample characteristics, study design and objectives, and psychometric properties of RTW-SE measures used were extracted from full texts. <i>Data Synthesis</i>: Descriptive statistics were used to synthesize data extracted from the articles.ResultsTen different instruments were used across the 29 articles, with the RTWSE-11 (n = 9) being the most frequently used. Articles explored the relationship between RTW-SE and various outcome variables including employment status, and expected time to RTW. Several articles also examined the extent to which RTW-SE predicted RTW, time to RTW, and work ability. Six articles tested psychosocial interventions, with half also incorporating a physical component to improve RTW-SE. None of the articles reported information about thresholds for meaningful change for RTW-SE.ConclusionsThis scoping review summarizes the current literature that describes the role of RTW-SE among cancer survivors who are in the process of returning to work. Future research is needed to determine the predictive validity and sensitivity to change of RTW-SE measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51373,"journal":{"name":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"10519815261445913"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Return-to-Work self-efficacy in cancer survivors: A scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Sheel V Singh, Stephen Brumbach Wechsler, Deirdre Connolly, Anna Blythe, Ryley McCarron, Brenna Bigenwald, Areej El-Jawahri, Kathleen Doyle Lyons\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10519815261445913\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BackgroundWhile enhancing return-to-work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) is known to improve return-to-work (RTW) outcomes in other populations, its conceptualization, measurement, and application within cancer populations remain unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this scoping review is to examine the empirical literature regarding how RTW-SE has been described, measured, and addressed among cancer survivors.Methods<i>Data Sources:</i> Seven databases were searched. In total, 1208 articles were identified and screened by title and abstract. After full-text review, 29 articles were included in the final data extraction and analysis for this scoping review. <i>Data Extraction</i>: Data related to sample characteristics, study design and objectives, and psychometric properties of RTW-SE measures used were extracted from full texts. <i>Data Synthesis</i>: Descriptive statistics were used to synthesize data extracted from the articles.ResultsTen different instruments were used across the 29 articles, with the RTWSE-11 (n = 9) being the most frequently used. Articles explored the relationship between RTW-SE and various outcome variables including employment status, and expected time to RTW. Several articles also examined the extent to which RTW-SE predicted RTW, time to RTW, and work ability. Six articles tested psychosocial interventions, with half also incorporating a physical component to improve RTW-SE. None of the articles reported information about thresholds for meaningful change for RTW-SE.ConclusionsThis scoping review summarizes the current literature that describes the role of RTW-SE among cancer survivors who are in the process of returning to work. Future research is needed to determine the predictive validity and sensitivity to change of RTW-SE measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10519815261445913\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815261445913\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815261445913","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Return-to-Work self-efficacy in cancer survivors: A scoping review.
BackgroundWhile enhancing return-to-work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) is known to improve return-to-work (RTW) outcomes in other populations, its conceptualization, measurement, and application within cancer populations remain unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this scoping review is to examine the empirical literature regarding how RTW-SE has been described, measured, and addressed among cancer survivors.MethodsData Sources: Seven databases were searched. In total, 1208 articles were identified and screened by title and abstract. After full-text review, 29 articles were included in the final data extraction and analysis for this scoping review. Data Extraction: Data related to sample characteristics, study design and objectives, and psychometric properties of RTW-SE measures used were extracted from full texts. Data Synthesis: Descriptive statistics were used to synthesize data extracted from the articles.ResultsTen different instruments were used across the 29 articles, with the RTWSE-11 (n = 9) being the most frequently used. Articles explored the relationship between RTW-SE and various outcome variables including employment status, and expected time to RTW. Several articles also examined the extent to which RTW-SE predicted RTW, time to RTW, and work ability. Six articles tested psychosocial interventions, with half also incorporating a physical component to improve RTW-SE. None of the articles reported information about thresholds for meaningful change for RTW-SE.ConclusionsThis scoping review summarizes the current literature that describes the role of RTW-SE among cancer survivors who are in the process of returning to work. Future research is needed to determine the predictive validity and sensitivity to change of RTW-SE measures.
期刊介绍:
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal''s subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.