BackgroundWorking-aged individuals diagnosed and treated for cancer require support and assistance to make decisions regarding work. However, healthcare professionals do not consider the work-related needs of patients and employers do not understand the full impact cancer can have upon the employee and their work. We therefore developed a work-related guidance tool for those diagnosed with cancer that enables them to take the lead in stimulating discussion with a range of different healthcare professionals, employers, employment agencies and support services. The tool facilitates discussions through a set of questions individuals can utilise to find solutions and minimise the impact cancer diagnosis, prognosis and treatment may have on their employment, sick leave and return to work outcomes. The objective of the present article is to describe the systematic development and content of the tool using Intervention Mapping Protocol (IMP).MethodsThe study used the first five steps of the intervention mapping process to guide the development of the tool. A needs assessment identified the ‘gaps’ in information/advice received from healthcare professionals and other stakeholders. The intended outcomes and performance objectives for the tool were then identified followed by theory-based methods and an implementation plan. A draft of the tool was developed and subjected to a two-stage Delphi process with various stakeholders. The final tool was piloted with 38 individuals at various stages of the cancer journey.ResultsThe tool was designed to be a self-led tool that can be used by any person with a cancer diagnosis and working for most types of employers. The pilot study indicated that the tool was relevant and much needed.ConclusionsIntervention Mapping is a valuable protocol for designing complex guidance tools. The process and design of this particular tool can lend itself to other situations both occupational and more health-care based.

Distributed workers - those who work autonomously and remotely from their organization’s main locations for at least some of their work-time, are an important and growing proportion of the workforce that share common characteristics of temporal and spatial distance. Yet many leadership styles and management practices assume face-to-face interaction, potentially rendering them less helpful in trying to ensure good occupational safety and health (OSH) outcomes for distributed workers. We conducted a systematic literature review to examine the leadership and management of OSH for distributed workers. Twenty-three papers were identified. Eleven papers identified established leadership styles, including leader-member exchange, (safety-specific) transformational and considerate leadership. Twenty papers examined management. Findings from these 20 papers were interpreted as representing resources, deployed through management and utilized by managers to ensure OSH for distributed workers, including communication technologies, social support, and a good safety climate. Despite limited research in this area, findings indicate the importance of both leadership and management in ensuring OSH for distributed workers. Findings suggest a fertile area for future enquiry

No systematic review had previously been conducted examining the benefits mindfulness or meditation interventions for leaders and managers. However, the literature suggested that such interventions would have a positive impact on leaders' own wellbeing, their leadership capability, their 'post-conventional' leadership capacity, and their direct reports. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically review research on mindfulness or meditation interventions for managers and leaders. Our review identified 19 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Findings indicate some encouraging signs that mindfulness and meditation interventions may improve aspects of leaders'/managers' wellbeing and resilience, and leadership capability, possibly including their 'post-conventional' leadership, but research results are very variable in quality and strength, and there was no evidence on benefits for participants' direct reports. The studies reviewed explored a diversity of interventions, but provided little insight into which mindfulness and meditation interventions for managers and leaders are most effective, in what context they are best applied, or for whom they are most suitable. While the sub-set of studies that measured mindfulness found that the interventions used did increase participants' mindfulness, there was no exploration of whether improved mindfulness was the mechanism by which other positive outcomes were achieved.

No abstract