SynthesisOccupational and environmental medicine2020
Are workplace health promotion programmes effective for all socioeconomic groups? A systematic review.
Synthesis in Occupational and environmental medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Socio-economic inequalities in the effectiveness of workplace health promotion programmes on body mass index: An individual participant data meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2020Pooled it
- Employer-provided workplace health promotion activities in Poland: evidence from a nationwide cross-sectional survey of full-time employees.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Implementation of a Workplace Weight Loss Program Using a Modified Process Evaluation Rating Sheet.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2026Article
- Understanding the needs of employees with non-communicable diseases regarding physical activity-related workplace health promotion programs: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Factors influencing the implementation of workplace-based health interventions for non-communicable disease prevention: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Employee expectations towards employer-provided workplace health promotion and mental health support: a 2025 cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic inequalities in physical function decline: multilevel longitudinal results from the HABITAT study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of workplace interventions for health promotion.The Lancet. Public health · 2025Review
- Evaluation of a training for managers in using active and personal communication to stimulate employee participation in a workplace smoking cessation program.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2025Article
- A Semantic Approach to Describe Social and Economic Characteristics That Impact Health Outcomes (Social Determinants of Health): Ontology Development Study.Online journal of public health informatics · 2024Article
- Perceived Factors Influencing Blue-Collar Workers' Participation in Worksite Health Promotion Programs in Freight Transport: A Qualitative Investigation Using the TDF and COM-B.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Giving voice to employees in low-skilled jobs works: Effect and process evaluation of a participatory sustainable employability intervention.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Precision prevention in worksite health-A scoping review on research trends and gaps.PloS one · 2024Article
- [Intentions of companies for health-promoting telework after the COVID-19 lockdown 2020].Pravention und Gesundheitsforderung · 2023Article
- Changes in Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Leisure Time Physical Exercise after a Citizen Science-Based Worksite Health Promotion Program for Blue-Collar Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Perceptions of employees with a low and medium level of education towards workplace health promotion programmes: a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- The process evaluation of a citizen science approach to design and implement workplace health promotion programs.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Shining the Light on You:: An Evidence-Based Program Designed to Improve the Health and Wellbeing of Family Child Care Professionals.Delaware journal of public health · 2022Article
- Association Between Work Status and the Use of Healthcare Services Among Women in the Republic of Korea.Safety and health at work · 2022Article
- Stakeholder dialogue on dilemmas at work as a workplace health promotion intervention including employees with a low SEP: a Responsive Evaluation.BMC public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decreasing socioeconomic health inequalities is considered an important policy priority in many countries. Workplace health promotion programmes (WHPPs) have shown modest improvements in health behaviour. This systematic review aims to determine the presence and magnitude of socioeconomic differences in effectiveness and the influence of programme characteristics on differential effectiveness of WHPPs. Three electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews published from 2013 onwards and for original studies published from 2015 onwards. We synthesised the reported socioeconomic differences in effectiveness of WHPPs on health behaviours, and calculated effectiveness ratios by dividing the programme effects in the lowest socioeconomic group by the programme effects in the highest socioeconomic group. Thirteen studies with 75 comparisons provided information on the effectiveness of WHPPs across socioeconomic groups. Ten studies with 54 comparisons reported equal effectiveness and one study with 3 comparisons reported higher effectiveness for lower socioeconomic groups. Quantitative information on programme effects was available for six studies with 18 comparisons, of which 13 comparisons showed equal effectiveness and 5 comparisons showed significantly higher effect sizes among workers in low socioeconomic position. The differential effectiveness of WHPPs did not vary across programme characteristics. In this study no indications are found that WHPPs increase socioeconomic inequalities in health behaviour. The limited quantitative information available suggests that WHPPs may contribute to reducing socioeconomic inequalities. Better insight is needed on socioeconomic differences in effectiveness of WHPPs to develop strategies to decrease socioeconomic inequalities in health in the workforce.
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.