Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34444248›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Engaging Occupational Safety and Health Professionals in Bridging Research and Practice: Evaluation of a Participatory Workshop Program in the Danish Construction Industry.

Mikkel Brandt, Ninna Maria Wilstrup, Markus D Jakobsen, Dwayne Van Eerd, Lars L Andersen, Jeppe Z N Ajslev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Supporting Occupational Health and Safety Risk Assessment Skills: A Case Study of Five Companies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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.

Mikkel BrandtNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Physical Workload, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1415-3097
Ninna Maria WilstrupNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Physical Workload, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Markus D JakobsenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Physical Workload, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dwayne Van EerdInstitute for Work & Health, Toronto, ON M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5672-0168
Lars L AndersenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Physical Workload, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2777-8085
Jeppe Z N AjslevNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Physical Workload, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Engaging occupational safety and health (OSH) professionals has scarcely been evaluated as a means for transferring knowledge to practice about physical workload in the construction industry. The aim of this work was to examine how participants used and incorporate research-based knowledge from a three-day training course into practice. Twenty OSH professionals from the Danish construction industry participated in a workshop-training course. Researchers presented new knowledge and results about physically demanding work. The participants selected which themes they wanted to work with and developed an action plan. Evaluation was done using surveys and phone interviews. Analysis was based on how the OSH-professionals describe themselves, organizations, and the construction industry. Participant's average scores on the level of implementation of their chosen action plans were 3 (on a response scale from 1-5, where 1 is 'to a very low degree' and 5 is 'to a very high degree') immediately after the workshop program and 2.5 at follow-up. Qualitative evaluations showed that actions had been initiated, and some progress had been made. The participants were satisfied with the workshop course and the possibility to increase their knowledge through inputs from researchers and colleges and strongly believe that they would succeed with implementing their action plans in the future.

Indexed as

Construction IndustryOccupational HealthDenmarkHealth PersonnelHumansWorkloadblue collar workersconstruction sectorconstruction workersmusculoskeletal disordersoccupational risk prevention

Identifiers

PMID34444248
PMCPMC8393704

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.