Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34247620›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Barriers and drivers of psychosocial risk assessments in German micro and small-sized enterprises: a qualitative study with owners and managers.

Valeria Pavlista, Peter Angerer, Mathias Diebig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Exploring Transfer Potentials of the IMPROVEInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Valeria PavlistaHeinrich-Heine University, Institute for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society; Medical Faculty, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany. valeria.pavlista@uni-duesseldorf.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1888-2198
Peter AngererHeinrich-Heine University, Institute for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society; Medical Faculty, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany.
Mathias DiebigHeinrich-Heine University, Institute for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Centre for Health and Society; Medical Faculty, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 02L16D020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe negative effect of unfavorable working conditions and long-term work stress on health has been demonstrated in previous research. To address these challenges, systematic approaches such as psychosocial risk assessments (PRA) have been developed in many countries worldwide. Despite legal obligations, psychosocial risk assessments are rarely carried out in micro and small-sized enterprises (MSE). Even though those enterprises constitute a large proportion of the general workforce, this area remains largely untouched by research. In order to enable starting points for a greater dissemination in organizational practice, the present study explores barriers and drivers of psychosocial risk assessments in micro and small-sized enterprises.

methodsA total of 18 owners and managers from 15 micro and small-sized enterprises in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany, were interviewed. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. A qualitative approach was applied: Content analysis was used to analyze the data, using deductive as well as inductive coding techniques.

resultsThe following barriers emerged from the interviews: Negative PRA image, stigmatization of mental health, lacking acceptance of employees, fear of excessive authority interference, ignorance of PRA, not understanding the necessity, inappropriate approach, and limited resources. The identified drivers were: Easy access to PRA material, external support from experts, renaming the term "workplace risk assessment", understanding content and benefit of PRA, simplify and revise PRA process, and noticeable consequences of PRA execution and non-execution. The results are comparable with those in larger companies. They emphasize the importance of mental health education, improving the process of psychosocial risk assessments, and the ongoing support in overcoming limited financial as well as human resources.

conclusionsTo improve implementation of PRA in organizational practice, a simplification of the process is proposed, accompanied by information campaigns and an improvement in the health literacy of owners and managers of MSE. In view of the results, the full revision of the PRA approach should also be considered.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthOccupational StressGermanyHumansRisk AssessmentWorkplaceHealth promotionHealth promotion implementationJob stressMicro- and small enterprisesOccupational health and safetyPsychosocial stressQualitative researchRisk assessmentSmall firmsWorking conditions

Identifiers

PMID34247620
PMCPMC8273035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.