ArticleJournal of agricultural safety and health2020
Assessing Health and Safety Concerns and Psychological Stressors among Agricultural Workers in the U.S. Midwest.
Article in Journal of agricultural safety and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recruitment of Row Crop Farmers into a Research Study to Assess Farm Hazards.Journal of agromedicine · 2024Article
- Impact of different financial incentive structures on a web-based health survey: do timing and amount matter?Connected health and telemedicine · 2023Article
- Well-being at work and Finnish dairy farmers─from job demands and loneliness towards burnout.Frontiers in psychology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is limited research exploring agricultural workers' own perspectives on the relative importance of the hazards and stressors they experience. There is also a lack of evidence on whether this reporting differs by method of elicitation. Finally, very little research exists on how to improve mail survey response rates among agricultural workers. We examined health and safety concerns and psychological stressors among Midwestern farmers. We assessed whether these reports varied by survey mode (mail survey versus in-person survey). The efficacy of two different types of incentives to enhance mail survey response rates among agricultural workers was also investigated. In 2018, a needs assessment survey was developed and mailed to a random sample of farm owner-operators in Iowa, Ohio, and Missouri, with randomly assigned prepaid or promised monetary incentives. In-person surveys were conducted among farm owner-operators and hired workers at three regional farm shows in Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. The mail survey response rates were compared by incentive type. Content analysis was used to generate themes associated with health and safety concerns and psychological stressors, which were then ranked by frequency counts. Chi-square tests were used to analyze variation in the distribution of these themes by survey mode. The response rate for the $1 prepaid incentive was double that of the $10 promised incentive. Content analysis identified 13 health and safety concerns and eight psychological stressors. Chemicals, equipment/tools, and health outcomes were the most frequently noted health and safety concerns. Finances, climate/weather, and farm workload and management were the most frequently noted psychological stressors. Although there was considerable overlap in survey responses across mail and in-person respondents, important differences by sample and survey mode characteristics were observed. The results can support a variety of stakeholders in prioritizing and developing interventions and educational resources to address health and safety concerns and psychological stressors among Midwestern farmers. Our findings also contribute to the evidence base on primary data collection methods for agricultural workers.
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.