Table 3 Multivariable models predicting future sickness absence. The table shows the predictive accuracy (explained variance expressed as adjusted R-square) from different domains of possible predictors. Note that some factors such as main type of work or the observed sickness absence rate during the concurrent year are hardly amenable to interventions – in contrast to models containing behavioral or organizational characteristics. The confidence interval was obtained from 200 bootstrap cycles randomly selecting individuals from all participants within departments for the analytical sample

Composition (age, gender) & context (type of work)

age, gender, main type of work (manual vs. non-manual)

(0.09–0.27)

Sick leave rate

Concurrent work-group sickness absence during the present year

(0.43–0.55)

Work ability index

work ability index, including quadratic term, adjusting for age, gender, main type of work

(0.26–0.48)

History & health behavior

smoking status, number of illnesses, number of regular medications, physical activity, AUDIT-C, self-reported sickness absence

(0.36–0.62)

Subjective health & work ability

SF12 mental and physical summary score, daytime sleepiness, exhaustion, work life conflict, work ability index

(0.35–0.64)

Work ability & Framingham index

Framingham relative risk, work ability index

(0.45–0.68)

Medical data & Framingham index

Framingham relative risk, body mass index, waist circumference, HbA1c, HDL, triglycerides, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, γ-glutamyltransferase

(0.57–0.79)

Psychosocial work characteristics

cognitive stress perception, meaning of work, commitment to the workplace, quality of leadership, predictability, possibilities for development, work life conflict

(0.60–0.81)

Parsimonious model, all domains

Framingham risk score, smoking status, meaning of work, commitment to the workplace, quality of leadership, predictability, possibilities for development, work life conflict

(0.66–0.85)