Introduction The return to the labour market after retirement is an increasing phenomenon in the North American population. It is the subject of a growing number of studies, whose conclusions seem inconsistent. As returning to working life after retirement is not neutral for individuals, the aim of this article is to present the protocol of a scoping review about its effects on older workers’ health.
Methods and analysis The methodology of Arksey and O’Malley, including the recommendations of Levac et al and Daudt et al will be used. The process is composed of seven steps, from the identification of the research question, to the planning of knowledge transfer activities. Documents dealing with retirees returning to work in connection with health will be explored and analysed using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.
Ethics and dissemination Approval has been obtained for the consultation step of the protocol (ethics board of the Centre intégré universitaire en santé et services sociaux de la Capitale Nationale, project #2019-1753). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols checklist will be used to support transparency and guide translation of findings. Findings will be shared with various stakeholders involved in older workers’ health. Findings will also be disseminated in workshops, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.
- older workers
- bridge employment
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors AL drafted the manuscript. M-ML drafted the abstract and proposed modifications to the manuscript. AN read and improved the manuscript. RR realised the literature search required to define the problematic and to design the study. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
Funding This study is supported by first author’s Fonds d’établissement de jeune chercheur from the Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval Institutional ethics approval is unnecessary for the secondary analysis of published literature. Although an ethics certification for the consultation step of the project, which deals with human participants, has been delivered by the research ethics board of the Centre intégré universitaire en santé et services sociaux de la Capitale Nationale (#2019–1753). As the consultation will take the form of a focus group, confidentiality and respect of opinions will be a central concern and all necessary precautions will be taken.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.