Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31478315›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational health2020

Outdoor workers' perceptions of skin cancer risk and attitudes to sun-protective measures: A qualitative study.

Marc Rocholl, Michaela Ludewig, Swen Malte John, Eva Maria Bitzer, Annika Wilke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Prevention and health promotion in dermatology].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Photoprotection in occupational dermatology.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marc RochollDepartment of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health Theory, Institute for Health Research and Education, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6584-0161
Michaela LudewigDepartment of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health Theory, Institute for Health Research and Education, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1214-1399
Swen Malte JohnDepartment of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health Theory, Institute for Health Research and Education, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Eva Maria BitzerPublic Health and Health Education, University of Education Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Annika WilkeDepartment of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health Theory, Institute for Health Research and Education, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Osnabrück University · DEUniversity of Education Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSince January 2015, squamous cell carcinoma or multiple actinic keratosis of the skin caused by natural ultraviolet irradiation (UVR) is recognized as occupational disease in Germany. Interventions which improve the sun protection behavior of outdoor workers are urgently needed. When developing preventive interventions, the attitudes of target groups need to be taken into consideration. Therefore, outdoor workers' perceptions and attitudes were investigated.

methodsSeven guided, problem-centered qualitative interviews with healthy male outdoor workers were conducted. A qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data.

resultsWe found an underestimation of the perceived skin cancer risk in the seven outdoor workers and heterogeneous attitudes toward the usage of sun-protective measures. Participants stated that the feasibility of technical sun-protective measures depends on the size of the working area. While using a headgear seemed common, none of the participants stated using additional neck protection. Wearing long-sleeved shirts and long trousers were considered problematic. The interviews revealed important requirements for sun-protective clothes, especially in terms of different materials. Although the usage of sunscreen was common, our interviewees seemed to apply it wrongly.

conclusionRisk perceptions of outdoor workers and their attitudes toward sun protection measures may influence the factual UV protection behavior in the workplace. Structures to facilitate the implementation of technical and organizational sun-protective measures seem to be necessary. Educational interventions and clear instructions which are tailored to the individual needs and attitudes of outdoor workers are required to improve the UV protection behavior and to avoid common mistakes.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeProtective ClothingSunscreening AgentsAdultConstruction IndustryFarmersGermanyHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedOccupational DiseasesOccupational ExposureQualitative ResearchRisk AssessmentSkin NeoplasmsSunscreening AgentsattitudeGermanyoccupational healthqualitative researchsunscreening agents

Identifiers

PMID31478315
PMCPMC6970388
OpenAlexW2971883435

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.