Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32185387›Full record

ReviewAnnals of work exposures and health2020

Evaluation of an Occupational Safety and Health Training for Cannabis Cultivation Workers.

Carol E Brown, Erin Shore, Mike V Van Dyke, Joshua Scott, Roberta Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of work exposures and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Stress, Mental Health, and Coping Among Workers in the Northern California Cannabis Industry: A Qualitative Descriptive Analysis.New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Occupational Allergies to Cannabis.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
    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.

Carol E BrownCenter for Health, Work & Environment, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Erin ShoreCenter for Health, Work & Environment, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Mike V Van DykeCenter for Health, Work & Environment, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Joshua Scott2U Inc., Denver, CO, USA.
Roberta SmithAxion Health, Broomfield, CO, USA.

Funding

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH EDUCATION AND RESEARCH CENTERS (T42)T42OH009229 · OH · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI NEWMAN, LEE S · 2007 to 2024
$28.8M
Occupational Health and Safety Surveillance in ColoradoU60OH010917 · OH · COLORADO STATE DEPT/PUB HLTH & ENVIRONMT · PI RICHARDSON, KRISTY · 2015 to 2019
$835k
NIOSH CDC HHS T42 OH009229NIOSH CDC HHS U60 OH010917
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAs the commercial cannabis industry grows, there is an increased need to characterize potentially hazardous workplace exposures and provide training to workers to mitigate these exposures with the goal of reducing accidents and injuries from cannabis cultivation, processing, and manufacturing. Public health and safety stakeholders in Colorado developed a worker-focused training designed to improve hazard awareness, recognition, and controls related to commercial cannabis cultivation. This paper describes the evaluation of this training.

methodsThe training was a full day, in-person educational experience directed to workers in the cannabis cultivation industry. Training topics included an overview of occupational safety and health hazards, chemical exposures, slip, trips, and falls, repetitive motion, the application of the hierarchy of control including lockout/tagout, machine guarding, personal protective equipment, among others. Evaluation surveys assessed attendee demographics, perceived job hazards, confidence to change workplace practices, knowledge, training relevancy and quality, intent to change behavior, as well as barriers and resources.

resultsA total of 208 people attended the safety trainings. One hundred and thirty-four participants (64%) completed the pre-training survey and 107 (51%) completed the post-training survey. Respondents provided high ratings for the quality and relevance of the training, with 91.3% of respondents rating the training very good or excellent. Before the training, the attendees listed their most concerning safety and health issues as exposure to pesticides and other chemicals (65.7%), absorbing chemicals through the skin (56.7%), slips, trips, and falls (52.2%), and respiratory hazards (50.7%). After the training, they reported the most concerning hazards to be slips, trips, and fall hazards (65.4%), ergonomic problems (64.5%), and respiratory issues (61.7%). There was a statistically non-significant increase in knowledge scores from 67.1% correct to 76.0% correct. Finally, 88.5% of respondents felt extremely or very confident that they could change their own health and safety practices at work.

conclusionsThe training successfully reached cannabis employees in cultivation, compliance, and management. Survey respondents felt that the training was of high quality and addressed gaps in their knowledge related to safety and health hazards in the cannabis industry. The workplace safety and health concerns shifted from pre- to post-training. There was a statistically non-significant increase in knowledge. Additional follow-up of training attendees would be beneficial to measure sustained impact of training.

Indexed as

Occupational ExposureOccupational HealthCannabisColoradoHumansWorkplacecannabiscontinuing educationmarijuanaoccupational safety and healthtrainingworkers

Identifiers

PMID32185387
PMCPMC8407453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.