Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34796514›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2022

Free agents or cogs in the machine? Classed, gendered, and racialized inequities in hazardous working conditions.

Jerzy Eisenberg-Guyot, Seth J Prins, Carles Muntaner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Straining Under Contradiction? Contradictory Class Locations and Job Strain in the United States.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Jerzy Eisenberg-GuyotDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3851-267X
Seth J PrinsDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2622-614X
Carles MuntanerDivision of Social and Behavioural Health Sciences, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING PROGRAM IN PSYCHIATRIC EPIDEMIOLOGYT32MH013043 · NIMH · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Katherine M. Keyes · 1985 to 2026
$11.7M
NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH013043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFew epidemiologic studies have used relational social class measures based on control over productive assets and others' labor to analyze inequities in health-affecting working conditions. Moreover, these studies have often neglected the gendered and racialized dimensions of class relations, dimensions which are essential to understanding population patterns of health inequities. Our study fills these gaps.

methodsUsing data from the 2002-2018 U.S. General Social Survey, we assigned respondents to the worker, manager, petit bourgeois, or capitalist classes based on their supervisory authority and self-employment status. Next, we estimated class, class-by-gender, and class-by-race inequities in compensation/safety, the labor process, control, and conflict, using Poisson models. We also estimated gender-by-race inequities among workers.

resultsWe identified substantial class inequities, with worse conditions for workers, which is the largest class within genders and racialized groups, but also disproportionately consists of women and people of color (POC), particularly women of color (WOC). For example, relative to workers, capitalists were less likely to report that safety is not a priority (prevalence ratio [PR]: 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21, 0.82), repetitive tasks (PR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.61), and lacking freedom (PR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.24). We also identified inequities among workers, with women and POC, particularly WOC, reporting worse conditions than white male workers, especially greater discrimination/harassment (WOC PR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.36, 2.13).

conclusionWe identified substantial inequities in working conditions across intersecting classes, genders, and racialized groups. These inequities threaten workers' health, particularly among women and POC.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthSocial ClassEmploymentFemaleHumansMaledivision of laborhealth inequitiesneo-Marxistoccupational healthracismsexismsocial classworking conditions

Identifiers

PMID34796514
PMCPMC8752498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.