Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20949545›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2011

Statement on national worklife priorities.

Martin Cherniack, Rob Henning, James A Merchant, Laura Punnett, Glorian R Sorensen, Gregory Wagner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. An employee total health management-based survey of Iowa employers.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2013
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Healthy workplaces? A survey of Massachusetts employers.American journal of health promotion : AJHP
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Martin CherniackCenter to Promote Health in the New England Workplace (CPH-NEW).
Rob Henning
James A Merchant
Laura Punnett
Glorian R Sorensen
Gregory Wagner

Funding

The Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health Center for Work, Health and WellbeingU19OH008861 · OH · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI SORENSEN, GLORIAN C · 2007 to 2025
$23.9M
Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England WorkplaceU19OH008857 · OH · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS LOWELL · PI PUNNETT, LAURA · 2006 to 2020
$20.4M
Healthier Workforce Center of the MidwestU19OH008868 · OH · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI ROHLMAN, DIANE S · 2006 to 2025
$19.8M
ACL HHS U19OH008861ACL HHS U19OH008868NIOSH CDC HHS 1U19 OH008857NIOSH CDC HHS 1U19 OH008868NIOSH CDC HHS 3U19 OH008861NIOSH CDC HHS U19 OH008857NIOSH CDC HHS U19 OH008861NIOSH CDC HHS U19 OH008868
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) WorkLife Initiative (WLI) [http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/worklife] seeks to promote workplace programs, policies, and practices that result in healthier, more productive employees through a focus simultaneously on disease prevention, health promotion, and accommodations to age, family, and life stage. The Initiative incorporates the Institute's foundational commitment to workplaces free of recognized hazards into broader consideration of the factors that affect worker health and wellbeing. Workplace hazards, such as physical demands, chemical exposures, and work organization, often interact with non-work factors such as family demands and health behaviors to increase health and safety risks. New workplace interventions being tested by the first three NIOSH WLI Centers of WorkLife Excellence are exploring innovative models for employee health programs to reduce the human, social, and economic costs of compromised health and quality of life. Many parties in industry, labor, and government share the goals of improving employee health while controlling health care costs. NIOSH convened a workshop in 2008 with representatives of the three Centers of Excellence to develop a comprehensive, long-range strategy for advancing the WorkLife Initiative. The recommendations below fall into three areas: practice, research, and policy. Responding to these recommendations would permit the WorkLife Center system to establish a new infrastructure for workplace prevention programs by compiling and disseminating the innovative practices being developed and tested at the Centers, and elsewhere. The WLI would also extend the customary scope of NIOSH by engaging with multiple NIH Institutes that are already generating research-to-practice programs involving the working-age population, in areas such as chronic disease prevention and management. Research to Practice (r2p) is a concept focused on the translation of research findings, technologies, and information into evidence-based prevention practices and products that are adopted in the workplace or other "real-world" settings. NIOSH's goal is to overcome the translational issues that now prevent state-of-the-art occupational health, health promotion, and chronic disease research findings from benefiting working age populations immediately, regardless of workplace size, work sector, or region of the country.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PromotionOccupational HealthCooperative BehaviorDiffusion of InnovationHealth PolicyHumansNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.Organizational PolicyPublic HealthUnited StatesWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID20949545
PMCPMC5860803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.