ReviewAmerican journal of industrial medicine2022
Worker and employer experiences with COVID-19 and the California Workers' Compensation System: A review of the literature.
Review 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Do occupational health and safety tools that utilize artificial intelligence have a measurable impact on worker injury or illness? Findings from a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Worker and employer experiences with COVID-19 and the California Workers' Compensation System: A review of the literature.American journal of industrial medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven workplace risks from COVID-19, California policymakers passed Senate Bill (SB) 1159 to facilitate access to workers' compensation (WC) benefits for frontline workers. However there has been no review of the available evidence needed to inform policy decisions about COVID-19 and WC.
methodsWe conducted a literature review on worker and employer experiences surrounding COVID-19 and WC, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
resultsForty articles were included (16 about worker experiences and 24 about employer practices). Most were not about experiences and practices related to COVID-19 and WC. Worker studies indicated that paid sick leave reduced new COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 activity. Studies also found that rural agricultural and food processing workers lacked sick leave protection and faced severe housing and food insecurity. Studies on workplace health and safety indicated that healthcare workers with access to personal protective equipment had lower stress levels. Studies about employer practices found that unrestricted work in high-contact industries was associated with increased risks to at-risk workers, and with health disparities. No studies examined worker COVID-19 experiences and WC claims or benefits, job loss, retaliation, workers' medical care experiences, and return-to-work or leave practices.
conclusionsOur review identified experiences and practice related to COVID-19 and the WC system, but not specifically about WC and COVID-19 WC claims or benefits. Further research is needed to document and understand evidence underpinning the need for WC coverage for COVID-19 and to evaluate the impact of the current SB 1159 bill on WC in California.
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.