Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32714774›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2020

Workplace-based opportunities to support child care workers' health and safety.

Amber E Vaughn, Erik A Willis, Dianne S Ward, Falon Smith, Anna Grummon, Laura A Linnan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Amber E VaughnCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1700 Martin L. King Jr. Blvd., CB 7426, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7426, USA.
Erik A WillisCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1700 Martin L. King Jr. Blvd., CB 7426, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7426, USA.
Dianne S WardCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1700 Martin L. King Jr. Blvd., CB 7426, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7426, USA.
Falon SmithCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1700 Martin L. King Jr. Blvd., CB 7426, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7426, USA.
Anna GrummonCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1700 Martin L. King Jr. Blvd., CB 7426, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7426, USA.
Laura A LinnanDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 307 Rosenau Hall, CB 7440, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7440, USA.

Funding

Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Child care workers earn among the lowest wages in the United States and they struggle with many health issues. The purpose of this study was to describe workplace supports for nutrition, physical activity, other health behaviors (e.g., smoking cessation, stress management), and occupational health and safety available to child care workers, and thereby inform the development of future workplace-based interventions to improve worker well-being. Between 2015 and 2016, 74 North Carolina child care centers (and directors), participating in a larger randomized controlled trial, completed a Workplace Health and Safety Assessment (interview and observation) measuring four domains: Infrastructure, Organizational Policies and Procedures, Programs and Promotions, and Internal Physical Environment. This study used baseline data to report means and standard deviations. Participating child care centers employed, on average, 12.7 ± 8.4 employees. Total scores from the Workplace Health and Safety Assessment averaged 41.3 ± 12.6 out of a possible 154, demonstrating many missed opportunities for supporting health/safety. More specifically, centers scored on average 9.5 ± 3.9 on Infrastructure (35% of potential points), 11.1 ± 3.9 on Organizational Policies and Procedures (32% of potential), 7.6 ± 5.4 on Programs and Promotions (12% of potential), and 13.1 ± 2.2 on Internal Physical Environment (49% of potential). The most frequent supports available were for occupational health and safety issues, while fewer supports were available for physical activity and other health behaviors. Child care workers could benefit greatly from more comprehensive workplace health and safety interventions; however, strategies must overcome centers' limited capacity and resources.

Indexed as

CARE, Caring and Reaching for HealthHealth promotionICC, Intraclass CorrelationNAEYC, National Association for the Education of Young ChildrenOccupational health and safetyTotal worker healthWorksite

Identifiers

PMID32714774
PMCPMC7369321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.