Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29530016›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

Role of working conditions in the explanation of occupational inequalities in work injury: findings from the national French SUMER survey.

Isabelle Niedhammer, Thomas Lesuffleur, Géraldine Labarthe, Jean-François Chastang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. MiXie, an Online Tool for Better Health Assessment of Workers Exposed to Multiple Chemicals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Isabelle NiedhammerINSERM, U1085, Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health (IRSET), Epidemiology in Occupational Health and Ergonomics (ESTER) Team, Faculté de Médecine, 28 rue Roger Amsler, CS 74521, F-49045, Angers, Cedex 01, France. isabelle.niedhammer@inserm.fr.
Thomas LesuffleurINSERM, U1085, Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health (IRSET), Epidemiology in Occupational Health and Ergonomics (ESTER) Team, Faculté de Médecine, 28 rue Roger Amsler, CS 74521, F-49045, Angers, Cedex 01, France.
Géraldine LabartheMinistry of Labour, DARES, Paris, France.
Jean-François ChastangINSERM, U1085, Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health (IRSET), Epidemiology in Occupational Health and Ergonomics (ESTER) Team, Faculté de Médecine, 28 rue Roger Amsler, CS 74521, F-49045, Angers, Cedex 01, France.
Inserm · FRInstitut de Recherche en Santé, Environnement et Travail · FRUniversité d'Angers · FR

Funding

French ministry of labour, DARES Grant no 2200684049
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial inequalities in work injury have been observed but explanations are still missing. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the contribution of working conditions in the explanation of social inequalities in work injury in a national representative sample of employees.

methodsThe study was based on the cross-sectional sample of the national French survey SUMER 2010 including 46,962 employees, 26,883 men and 20,079 women. The number of work injuries within the last 12 months was studied as the outcome. Occupation was used as a marker of social position. Psychosocial work factors included various variables related to the classical job strain model, psychological demands, decision latitude, social support, and other understudied variables related to reward, job insecurity, job promotion, esteem, working time and hours and workplace violence. Occupational exposures of chemical, biological, physical and biomechanical nature were also studied. Weighted age-adjusted Poisson regression analyses were performed.

resultsOccupational gradients were observed in the exposure of most psychosocial work factors and occupational exposures. Strong occupational differences in work injury were found, blue-collar workers being more likely to have work injury. Chemical, biological, physical and biomechanical exposures contributed to explain the occupational differences in work injury substantially. Noise, thermic constraints, manual materials handling, postural/articular constraints and vibrations had significant contributions. Psychosocial work factors also contributed to explain the differences especially among women.

conclusionPrevention policies oriented toward chemical, biological, physical, biomechanical and psychosocial work exposures may contribute to reduce the magnitude of occupational differences in work injury.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFranceHumansMaleModels, StatisticalOccupational ExposureOccupational InjuriesOccupationsRisk FactorsSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkOccupational exposuresPsychosocial work factorsSocial inequalities in healthWorking conditionsWork injury

Identifiers

PMID29530016
PMCPMC5848457
OpenAlexW2789986690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.