ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2022
Reliability of O*NET physical exposures between Italian and US databases.
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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a gender-specific European job exposure matrix (EuroJEM) for physical workload and its validation against musculoskeletal pain.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2025Article
- The association between wet work and hand eczema in the Dutch general population: Application of a job exposure matrix to the lifelines cohort study.Contact dermatitis · 2025Article
- Does the time spent in retirement improve health? An IV-Poisson assessment on the incidence of cardiovascular diseases.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2024Article
- Occupational physical activity, all-cause mortality and incidence of cardiovascular diseases: results from three Italian cohorts.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComparison between cross-national job-exposure matrices (JEMs) may provide indications of their reliability, particularly if created using the same items. This study evaluated concordance between two JEMs created from United States (US) and Italian O*NET data, using job codes linked through international job codes.
methodsTwenty-one physical exposures were obtained from the US and Italian O*NET databases. Italian O*NET items were direct translations of US O*NET items. Six hundred and eighty-four US and 586 Italian job codes were linked via crosswalks to 281 ISCO-08 job codes. A sensitivity study also assessed concordance on 258 jobs matched one-to-one across the two national job classifications. Concordance of US and Italian O*NET exposures was estimated by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) in multilevel models adjusted and not adjusted for country.
resultsICCs showed moderate to poor agreement for all physical exposures in jobs linked through ISCO-08 codes. There was good to moderate agreement for 14 out of 21 exposures in models with one-to-one matched jobs between countries; greater agreement was found in all models adjusted for country. Exposure to whole-body vibration, time standing, and working outdoor exposed to weather showed the highest agreement.
conclusionsThese results showed moderate to good agreement for most physical exposures across the two JEMs when US and Italian jobs were matched one-to-one and the analysis was adjusted for country. Job code assignments through crosswalks and differences in exposure levels between countries might greatly influence the observed cross-country agreement. Future multinational epidemiological studies should consider the quality of the cross-national job matching, and potential cross-national differences in exposure levels.
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.