Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34446682›Full record

ReviewLa Medicina del lavoro2021

Effectiveness of preventive interventions and Randomised Controlled Trials in Occupational Health: an overview of the last five decades.

Stefano Mattioli, Jos Verbeek, Simone Mattei, Stefania Curti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in La Medicina del lavoro, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

4 authors.

Stefano MattioliDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy. s.mattioli@unibo.it.
Jos VerbeekUniversity Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. jverbeek@cochrane.org.
Simone MatteiSchool of Occupational Medicine, University of Bologna, Italy. simonemattei914@gmail.com.
Stefania CurtiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy. stefania.curti@unibo.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEvidence-Based Medicine, as a new scientific paradigm, modified the approach to diagnosis, -treatment and prevention of diseases based on the best available scientific evidence synthesized in systematic reviews since the last decade of the past century. To evaluate its influence, we assessed the trend in the number and proportion of -randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of preventive interventions in occupational health (OH) over the last five decades.

methodsPubMed has been searched using established search filters regarding occupational determinants of diseases, OH preventive interventions, RCTs and systematic reviews. The number of hits were -assessed per decade. We estimated the number of pertinent studies in the systematically recruited samples of retrieved citations.

resultsOver the years, the number of studies concerning the effectiveness of preventive interventions in OH increased 3.5-fold from 986 in 1970-1979 to 3,428 in 2010-2019. RCTs of preventive interventions increased more than 60-fold from 6 in the seventies to 370 in the last decade. Systematic reviews first appeared at the end of the past century with a 30-fold increase (from 4 to 120) over the last three decades. DISCUSSION: The number of high-quality studies, such as RCTs and systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of preventive interventions in OH, has increased more rapidly than other studies on this topic. The Evidence-Based Medicine philosophy, diffused by researchers worldwide, has promoted the evaluation of the effectiveness of preventive interventions in OH.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34446682
PMCPMC8436825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.