Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31051037›Full record

ArticleAnnals of work exposures and health2019

Assessment of Heat Stress Exposure among Construction Workers in the Hot Desert Climate of Saudi Arabia.

Mohammed Al-Bouwarthan, Margaret M Quinn, David Kriebel, David H Wegman

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of work exposures and health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 1 institution in 2 countries.

Mohammed Al-BouwarthanDepartment of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
Margaret M QuinnDepartment of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
David KriebelDepartment of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
David H WegmanDepartment of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, USA.
University of Massachusetts Lowell · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesExcessive heat exposure poses significant risks to workers in hot climates. This study assessed the intensity and duration of heat stress exposure among workers performing residential construction in southeastern Saudi Arabia (SA) during the summer, June-September 2016. Objectives were to: identify work factors related to heat stress exposure; measure environmental heat exposure at the construction sites; assess the heat stress risk among workers using the wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) index; and determine if temperature-humidity indices can be appropriate alternatives to WBGT for managing heat stress risk at the construction sites.

methodsWorksite walkthrough surveys and environmental monitoring were performed, indoors and outdoors, at 10 construction sites in Al-Ahsa Province. A heat stress exposure assessment was conducted according to the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH®) guidelines, which uses the WBGT index. WBGT measurements from two instruments were compared. Alternative heat stress indices were compared to the WBGT: the heat index (HI) and humidex (HD) index.

resultsConstruction workers were exposed to excessive heat stress, indoors and outdoors over a large part of the work day. Complying with a midday outdoor work ban (12-3 p.m.) was not effective in reducing heat stress risk. The highest intensity of exposure was outdoors from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.; a period identified with the highest hourly mean WBGT values (31-33°C) and the least allowable working time according to ACGIH® guidelines. Comparison of the alternative indices showed that the HI is more reliable than the HD as a surrogate for the WBGT index in the climate studied.

conclusionThe extreme heat exposure represents a serious risk. The severity of heat stress and its impact are projected to increase due to climate change, emphasizing the need for immediate improvement of the current required protective measures and the development of occupational heat stress exposure guidelines in SA.

Indexed as

Construction IndustryDesert ClimateEnvironmental MonitoringHeat Stress DisordersHot TemperatureHumansHumidityOccupational ExposureOccupational HealthSaudi ArabiaSeasonsclimate changeconstruction industryextreme heatheat stressheat stress indices

Identifiers

PMID31051037
PMCPMC6527521
OpenAlexW2947262234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.