ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental medicine2010
Health promotion site selection blues: barriers to participation and implementation.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences recruiting Indian worksites for an integrated health protection and health promotion randomized control trial in Maharashtra, India.Health education research · 2015Trial
- 'Relieved Working' study: systematic development and design of an intervention to decrease occupational quartz exposure at construction worksites.BMC public health · 2014Trial
- Using Total Worker HealthInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Barriers and drivers of psychosocial risk assessments in German micro and small-sized enterprises: a qualitative study with owners and managers.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Defining 'Integration' for Total Worker Health®: A New Proposal.Annals of work exposures and health · 2020Article
- Integrated worker health protection and promotion programs: overview and perspectives on health and economic outcomes.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2013Review
- Healthy workplaces? A survey of Massachusetts employers.American journal of health promotion : AJHPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo shed light on research-to-practice challenges in workplace health promotion research.
methodsMore than 1200 companies serviced by a national insurer were assessed by measures, including management surveys, and insurance premium costs and risk profile. A 21-item Workplace Readiness Checklist was the core assessment tool. Quantitative and qualitative measures were used to identify 12 to 14 companies deemed most "ready for change."
resultsThe four priority candidate companies decided against participation. A post hoc survey to evaluate reasons for non-participation identified factors such as time allocations, the deteriorating economic environment, and the participatory nature of the interventions proposed for half of the study sites. Differing priorities within management also seemed to interfere with participation.
conclusionsA highly structured process for determining corporate readiness for participatory health promotion produced contradictory results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.