ArticleJournal of agromedicine2022
Experiences of Marshallese Food Processing Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Journal of agromedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moana: Alternate surveillance for COVID-19 in a Unique Population (MASC-UP).Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The goal of this study was to conduct an exploratory assessment of COVID-19 mitigation steps and compare workplace experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic with Marshallese workers in other occupations. Marshallese adults residing in the continental United States (US) and Hawaii took part in an online survey. The sample was divided into two categories: food processing workers and workers in all other occupations. To examine differences between food processing workers and workers from all other occupations, we used Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U tests and Fisher's Exact tests. Of those employed at the time of the survey (n = 113), 31 were employed in food processing plants, and 82 were employed in another occupation. Food processing workers and workers in other occupations differed significantly on level of education, length of residence in the US, English-speaking ability, and health literacy. More food processing workers reported that their employers installed barriers or provided shields (45%), provided temperature screenings (71%), and tested for COVID-19 (61%) compared with those in other occupations. A larger proportion of food processing workers reported having no sick leave compared with workers in other occupations, although they reported COVID-19 testing and being insured at similar rates. This is the first study to examine Marshallese food processing workers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings show that while some food processing employers implemented government-recommended guidelines to prevent the spread of COVID-19, preventative and protective measures were not comprehensively applied across the food processing industry, despite efforts by public health agencies and community partners.
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.