ArticlePloS one2016
Workplace Health Promotion: Assessing the Cardiopulmonary Risks of the Construction Workforce in Hong Kong.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular Health of Construction Workers in Hong Kong: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveHealth needs of different employee subgroups within an industry can differ. We report the results of a workplace cardiopulmonary risk assessment targeting workers and support staff in the construction industry.
methodsA free worksite-based cardiopulmonary risk assessment for 1,903 workers on infrastructural contracts across Hong Kong was initiated in May 2014. Cardiopulmonary risk screening was performed in 60-minute blocks for approximately 30 workers/block with individualized feedback and lifestyle counseling. Risk profiles stratified by occupational roles are differentiated using the χ2-test for categorical and Student's t-test for continuous variables.
resultsMost construction workers and clerks/professionals were male (83.2% and 71.2%, respectively) and Chinese (78.7% and 90.9%, respectively). Construction workers were older (mean: 44.9 years, SD 11.5) and less well-educated (6.1% received tertiary education) than clerks/professionals (35.0 years, 10.7; 72.6% received tertiary education), but more likely to be hypertensive (22.6% vs. 15.4%, p<0.001), overweight/obese (71.7% vs. 56.6%, p<0.001), centrally obese (53.1% vs. 35.5%, p<0.001), and have undesirable levels of high-density lipoprotein (41.6% vs. 35.8%, p<0.05) and diabetic levels of non-fasting blood glucose (4.3% vs. 1.6%, p<0.05). Up to 12.6% of construction workers and 9.7% of office clerks/professions had three or more metabolic syndrome risk factors. While construction workers were more likely than clerks/professionals to be daily smokers, they reported better work-related physical activity and diet.
conclusionsSimple worksite health risk screening can identify potentially high-cardiopulmonary-risk construction industry employee subgroups for onward confirmatory referral. Separate cardiopulmonary health promotion strategies that account for the varying lifestyle profiles of the two employee subgroups in the industry appear justified.
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.