ArticleInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2019
Cumulative physical workload and mobility limitations in middle-aged men and women: a population-based study with retrospective assessment of workload.
Article in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ergonomic challenges in healthcare: mapping physical load during patient transfers using electromyographic field measurements.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Changes in physical performance according to job demands across three cohorts of older workers in the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam.European journal of ageing · 2023Article
- The impact of manual patient handling on work ability: A cross-sectional study in a Brazilian hospital.Nursing open · 2022Observational
- Physical exposure during patient transfer and risk of back injury & low-back pain: prospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the association between exposure to physical workload throughout working life and risk of mobility limitations in midlife in a population-based Danish cohort.
methodsThe study was cross-sectional with a retrospective exposure assessment, and data were from a questionnaire used in the Copenhagen Aging and Biobank. Cumulative physical workload was estimated by combining information about the participants' employments and data from a job exposure matrix. Daily amount of lifting was standardised in ton-years (lifting 1000 kg/day/year) and grouped in 5 exposure groups (no/minor (1-2 ton-years)/low (3-10 ton-years)/moderate (11-20 ton-years)/high exposure (> 20 ton-years)). The outcome was self-reports of mobility limitations (running 100 m, walking 400 m, and climbing stairs to the 2nd floor) in midlife. The association between exposure and outcome was analysed using logistic regression models.
resultsWe included 4996 men and 2247 women, mean age 56 years. 21% of men and 10% of women were in the highest exposure-group (> 20 ton-years). Higher cumulative exposure was associated with higher odds for mobility limitations. Exposure to more than 20 ton-years compared to no exposure increased the odds for limitations in walking, age-adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.2 (95% CI: 2.4-4.3) for men, 2.3 (1.4-3.8) for women. Corresponding results for running: 2.5 (2.2-3.0) for men, 1.6 (1.2-2.2) for women, and for limitations in climbing stairs: 4.2 (3.3-5.2) for men, 1.7 (1.2-2.4) for women. Results were attenuated when confounders were added.
conclusionsExposure to physical workload throughout working life is associated with higher odds for mobility limitations in midlife.
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.