ArticleBMJ open2018
Protection of pregnant women at work in Switzerland: practices, obstacles and resources. A mixed-methods study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Evaluation of a blended care programme for caregivers and working pregnant women to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes: an intervention study.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLike most industrialised countries, Switzerland has introduced legislation to protect the health of pregnant workers and their unborn children from workplace exposure. This legislation provides for a risk assessment, adaptations to workplaces and, if the danger is not eliminated, preventive leave (prescribed by a gynaecologist). This study's first objective is to analyse the degree to which companies, gynaecologists and midwives implement the law. Its second objective is to understand the obstacles and resources of this implementation, with a focus on how relevant stakeholders perceive protective measures and their involvement with them. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Data will be collected using mixed methods: (1) online questionnaires for gynaecologists and midwives; telephone questionnaires with company human resources (HR) managers in the healthcare and food production sectors; (2a) case studies of 6-8 companies in each sector, including interviews with stakeholders such as women workers, HR managers and occupational health physicians; (2b) two focus groups, one involving occupational physicians and hygienists, one involving labour inspectors.Quantitative data will be analysed statistically using STATA software V.15. Qualitative data will be transcribed and thematically analysed using MaxQDA software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Human Research Ethics Committee of the Canton Vaud (CER-VD) has certified that this research study protocol falls outside of the field of application of the Swiss Federal Act on Research Involving Humans.The publications and recommendations resulting from this study will form the starting point for future improvements to the protection of pregnant women at work and their unborn children.This study started in February 2017 and will continue until January 2020.
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.