ArticleBMJ open2018
Workplace health promotion for employees working in offshore wind parks in the German exclusive economic zone: a mixed-methods study.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Musculoskeletal pain among offshore wind industry workers: a cross-sectional study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2020Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the awareness and use of health promotion offers among offshore wind workers and to study associations with demographic and workplace characteristics. To examine employees' reasons for (non-)participation and their wishes for health promotion activities offshore.
designMixed-methods study presenting the results from semistructured telephone interviews and a web-based cross-sectional survey.
settingOffshore wind parks in the German exclusive economic zone in the North and Baltic Seas.
participants21 offshore workers in the qualitative study (19 male/2 female; all German). 303 offshore workers in the quantitative study (287 male/13 female; 275 German/24 other nationalities). OUTCOME MEASURES: Awareness and use of workplace health promotion offers and associations with demographic and workplace characteristics (age, work schedule and wind park phase); reasons for (non-)participation; needs and wishes for health promotion offers.
resultsFew workers indicated being aware of health promotion programmes at their workplace. Single offers were reported, with fitness facilities being the most common offer employees recognised and had used (n=168, 55.6%). Employees with a regular work schedule were more likely to have used fitness facilities offshore (adjusted OR (AOR)=3.22, 95% CI 1.53 to 6.80). Workers in the construction phase were more likely to have used massages (AOR=8.19, 95% CI 2.82 to 23.77). Younger workers were less likely to belong to the group of those who were aware of fitness facilities but had not used them (AOR=0.43, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.98). Employees expressed various needs and wishes for behavioural and environmental preventive measures offshore.
conclusionsThe results demonstrate a perceived need among the workers for the development of health promotion programmes offshore. Since the awareness and use of offers may partly depend on personal and organisational characteristics, this should be taken into account in the planning of health promotion activities.
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.