Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34839446›Full record

ArticleCurrent environmental health reports2021

Sex and Gender Differences in Occupational Hazard Exposures: a Scoping Review of the Recent Literature.

A Biswas, S Harbin, E Irvin, H Johnston, M Begum, M Tiong, D Apedaile, M Koehoorn, P Smith

Open access · bronzeAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Current environmental health reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
16.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

102 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Years of life lost due to external causes in Honduras, 2013 - 2023.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

A BiswasInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada. abiswas@iwh.on.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-0393-6280
S HarbinInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.
E IrvinInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6207-5292
H JohnstonInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3357-3166
M BegumInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.
M TiongInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9708-1756
D ApedaileDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4663-8459
M KoehoornInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5376-7489
P SmithInstitute for Work & Health, 400 University Ave., Suite 1800, Toronto, ON, M5G 1S5, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8286-4563
Institute for Work & Health · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAPublic Health Ontario · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewComparative research on sex and/or gender differences in occupational hazard exposures is necessary for effective work injury and illness prevention strategies. This scoping review summarizes the peer-reviewed literature from 2009 to 2019 on exposure differences to occupational hazards between men and women, across occupations, and within the same occupation. RECENT

findingsFifty-eight studies retrieved from eight databases met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 30 studies were found on physical hazards, 38 studies on psychological/psychosocial hazards, 5 studies on biological hazards, and 17 studies on chemical hazards. The majority of studies reported that men were exposed to noise, vibration, medical radiation, physically demanding work, solar radiation, falls, biomechanical risks, chemical hazards, and blood contamination; while women were exposed to wet work, bullying and discrimination, work stress, and biological agents. Within the same occupations, men were more likely to be exposed to physical hazards, with the exception of women in health care occupations and exposure to prolonged standing. Women compared to men in the same occupations were more likely to experience harassment, while men compared to women in the same occupations reported higher work stress. Men reported more exposure to hazardous chemicals in the same occupations as women. The review suggests that men and women have different exposures to occupational hazards and that these differences are not solely due to a gendered distribution of the labor force by occupation. Findings may inform prevention efforts seeking to reduce gender inequalities in occupational health. Future research is needed to explain the reasons for sex/gender inequality differences in exposures within the same occupation.

Indexed as

Occupational ExposureOccupational HealthEmploymentFemaleHumansMaleOccupationsSex FactorsGender-based analysisOccupational healthSafetyScoping reviewSex differencesWorkers

Identifiers

PMID34839446
PMCPMC8627292
OpenAlexW3216239564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.