ArticleLa Medicina del lavoro2020
Scientific evidence and guidelines in occupational medicine.
Article in La Medicina del lavoro, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- EEG Evaluation of Stress Exposure on Healthcare Workers During COVID-19 Emergency: Not Just an Impression.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2022Article
- Current Italian contribution to research in Occupational Medicine.La Medicina del lavoro · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past, science has had a conflicting relationship with the philosophy from which it has detached itself due to the scientific method of Galileo Galilei, but anti-scientific atti-tudes and thoughts still persist in every field of knowledge. Occupational Medicine, like other medical disciplines, increasingly needs to have a scientific foundation that guaran-tees evidence and appropriateness for its varied professional activities. Guidance tools for occupational physicians and, in particular, the Guidelines of Scientific Societies repre-sent an indispensable contribution to correct professional practice. In many countries, in addition to the International Society of Reference and International Commission of Occu-pational Health (ICOH), there are National Societies of Occupational Medicine and many of these, such as the Italian Society of Occupational Medicine, regularly publish policy tools and guidelines for the occupational physician. It is not always possible to base the Guidelines in the field of occupational medicine exclusively on consolidated scientific ev-idence but it is still necessary to increase research and publications aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of specific interventions in the preventive, clinical and rehabilitative field of occupational medicine in order to guide occupational physicians to an increasingly appropriate practice. In Italy, a recent law allows the production of Guidelines that partially exempt criminal lia-bility for inexperience through a System of Guidelines produced by accredited Scientific Societies.
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.