ArticleHealth science reports2022
Occupational safety and health guidelines in relation to COVID-19 risk, death risk, and case-fatality proportion: An international, ecological study.
Article in Health science reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preparing the occupational safety and health workforce for future disruptions.American journal of industrial medicine · 2024Article
- Occupational safety and health guidelines in relation to COVID-19 risk, death risk, and case-fatality proportion: An international, ecological study.Health science reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) began in 2019 with several unknown factors. The World Health Organization (WHO) subsequently developed COVID-19 occupational safety and health (OSH) guidelines to reduce occupational COVID-19 transmission. Many countries also developed their own COVID-19 OSH guidelines, but whether these guidelines included WHO's guidelines and whether including WHO's guidelines in countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines reduced COVID-19 transmission is unknown. Objectives: The objectives of our study were to (1) compare the COVID-19 OSH guidelines of several countries to WHO's OSH guidelines, (2) estimate associations between characteristics of countries and their OSH guidelines and the number of WHO's OSH guidelines included in countries' OSH guidelines, and (3) estimate associations between WHO's OSH guidelines included in countries' OSH guidelines and COVID-19 risk, death risk, and case-fatality proportion. Methods: This study represents international, ecological research of 36 countries from all six world health regions. Countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines were compared with WHO's OSH guidelines. Linear regression models adjusted for potential confounders were used to estimate associations of interest. Results: The median number of WHO's 15 COVID-19 OSH guidelines included in countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines was eight. Countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines focused on workers included significantly more of WHO's COVID-19 OSH guidelines than countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines focused on general populations. Including "provide personal protective equipment for workers" and "create workplace policy for wearing personal protective equipment" in countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines were significantly related to decreased COVID-19 risk, death risk, and/or case-fatality proportion. Conclusions: Countries' COVID-19 OSH guidelines should include WHO's guidelines, focus on workers, and include "provide personal protective equipment for workers" and "create workplace policy for wearing personal protective equipment."
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.