Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36401320›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2022

Do regulatory tools instigate measures to prevent work-related psychosocial and ergonomic risk factors? A process evaluation of a Labour inspection authority trial in the Norwegian home-care services.

Håkon A Johannessen, Stein Knardahl, Jan S Emberland, Øivind Skare, Bjørnar Finnanger Garshol

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03855163 (Effectiveness of the Labour Inspection Authority's Regulatory Tools on Work Environment and Employee Health - Study Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Among Norwegian Home-care Workers), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT03855163 nacompletednot on this map

Effectiveness of the Labour Inspection Authority's Regulatory Tools on Work Environment and Employee Health - Study Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Among Norwegian Home-care Workers

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Institute of Occupational Health, NorwayRan2019 to 2022Enrolled2,555ConditionsOccupational Health, Sick Leave, Occupational ExposureArmsInspection visits, Guidance workshops, Online risk assessment tool
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Scoping review on the effect of labour inspections on occupational health and safety: a meta-analytic update.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2026
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Håkon A JohannessenDepartment of Work Psychology and Physiology, National Institute of Occupational Health, Majorstuen, 5330, N-0034, Oslo, Norway. hajo@stami.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9974-4824
Stein KnardahlNational Institute of Occupational Health, Majorstuen, 5330, N-0034, Oslo, Norway.
Jan S EmberlandDepartment of Work Psychology and Physiology, National Institute of Occupational Health, Majorstuen, 5330, N-0034, Oslo, Norway.
Øivind SkareDepartment of Occupational Medicine and Epidemiology, National Institute of Occupational Health, Majorstuen, 5330, N-0034, Oslo, Norway.
Bjørnar Finnanger GarsholDepartment of Work Psychology and Physiology, National Institute of Occupational Health, Majorstuen, 5330, N-0034, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThere is a research gap regarding the way managers and employee representatives respond to Labour Authority interventions targeting work-related psychosocial and ergonomic risk factors. The present study aimed to determine if (I) labour inspections and (II) guidance-through-workshops led by inspectors were perceived by the target audience as equally useful and educational; and to determine if utility and enhanced knowledge were associated with the implementation of measures to prevent work-related risk factors. Finally, it aimed to determine if the managers in the intervention groups to a greater extent than the controls reported implementing such measures.

resultsManagers and employee representatives in both intervention groups reported a high level of perceived utility as well as a high level of enhanced knowledge. Both utility (p < 0.05) and enhanced knowledge (p < 0.05) were significantly associated with the implementation of, or plans to soon implement, measures to improve working conditions. When compared to controls, implemented measures, or plans to implement measures, were reported significantly more frequently by managers in the inspection group (p < 0.05). Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03855163 Registered on February 26, 2019.

Indexed as

ErgonomicsHome Care ServicesHumansNorwayRisk FactorsCluster randomised controlled trialOccupational health and safetyProcess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID36401320
PMCPMC9673432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.