148 Chapter 6 asked to indicate their consent for participation in the study. At the end of the survey, participants were asked if they were willing to participate in a follow-up study. If so, these participants received an e-mail with a link to the second survey three months after filling out the first survey (i.e., T2). The period of three months was chosen because we expected that such a time interval would be sufficiently long to allow change in the focal mediators (exhaustion, work engagement). Again, at the end of the survey, participants were asked if they were willing to participate in a follow-up study in the future. The third survey was sent to the participants two years later (i.e., T3). We opted for a two-year follow-up because this time period would presumably be sufficiently long to allow considerable change in the outcome variables (functional limitations, absenteeism, creative work performance). Thus, the entire research period comprised 2.5 years. We obtained approval for our research study from the ethics committee of a Dutch university (#19-042.R1). The total member base of the NLV that may theoretically have been reached through the e-mails we sent and the call in the newsletter and website we posted comprises 1500 members. Of these members, 327 (22%) filled out the first questionnaire. All participants suffered from chronic liver disease, such as primary sclerosing cholangitis (27%), autoimmune hepatitis (26%), primary biliary cholangitis (22%), liver cirrhosis (7%), hepatitis B (3%), and hepatitis C (3%). Additionally, 19% of the participants were on the waiting list or had received a liver transplant. Participants were either still working, in rehabilitation trajectories, recipients of social security benefits (i.e., working fewer hours or not at all), or retired. In total, 192 of the participants (59%) were still working to some extent and were, therefore, able to answer our work-related questions and participate in the current study. We matched Time 1 (T1), Time 2 (T2), and Time 3 (T3) data based on their self-provided e-mail addresses, which were deleted from our records afterwards. There were 99 working participants (52%) who participated on at least two time points, and 83 working participants who participated on all three time points (44%). Consequently, the latter group of participants together formed the sample we used in our hypotheses testing analyses. At T1, the mean age of the participants was 48.73 (SD = 10.75), and 67% of the sample was female. Of all participants, 37% had completed higher vocational training, and 16% held a university degree. On average, participants worked 25.65 hours per week (SD = 14.05) in a wide range of professions and industries, including health care (25%), government (15%), education (11%),
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw