Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36627294›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Culture and awareness of occupational health risks amongst UK firefighters.

Taylor A M Wolffe, Louis Turrell, Andrew Robinson, Kathryn Dickens, Anna Clinton, Daniella Maritan-Thomson, Anna A Stec

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Taylor A M WolffeCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Louis TurrellCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Andrew RobinsonCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Kathryn DickensCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Anna ClintonCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Daniella Maritan-ThomsonCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.
Anna A StecCentre for Fire and Hazards Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK. aastec@uclan.ac.uk.
University of Lancashire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Firefighters are exposed to toxic chemicals not only from the fire incidents they attend, but also from their contaminated station and/or personal protective equipment (PPE). Little is currently known about firefighters' awareness, attitudes, and behaviours towards contaminants which was assessed in the UK firefighter contamination survey. Results revealed that lack of training on fire effluents and their health outcomes are strongly associated with increased fire smoke/contaminant exposure. Notably, untrained firefighters were at least twice as likely to: never clean personal protective equipment (PPE) (Crude Odds Ratio, OR 2.0, 1.5-2.7), infrequently send their PPE for professional cleaning (OR 2.0, 1.6-2.4), remain in the workwear (t-shirt etc.) worn while attending a fire incident (OR up to 3.6, 2.3-5.6), and indicate that cleaning at fire stations is not taken seriously (OR 2.4, 2.2-2.6). Firefighters personally viewing contamination as a "badge of honour" (BoH) were at least twice as likely to: remain in contaminated PPE after fire incidents (OR 2.3, 1.4-3.9), eat with sooty hands (OR 2.2, 1.9-2.5), notice soot in the nose/throat (OR 3.7, 2.7-5.2), and smell fire smoke on the body for more than a day after incidents (OR 2.0, 1.6-2.4). They were also more likely to indicate that cleaning at fire stations is not taken seriously (OR 2.5, 2.2-2.9) and that fire stations smell of smoke always/most of the time (OR 2.3, 2.0-2.6). Strong links were also found between belief in the BoH and never cleaning PPE (OR 1.9, 1.4-2.7), and eating while wearing contaminated PPE (OR 1.8, 1.5-2.2).

Indexed as

FirefightersOccupational ExposureOccupational HealthHumansSmokeUnited KingdomSmoke

Identifiers

PMID36627294
PMCPMC9832120
OpenAlexW4315491241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.