Observational studyBalkan medical journal2023
Perspective of Workers’ Union Representatives on COVID-19 Measures in Turkish Workplaces in the First Year of the Pandemic
Observational study in Balkan medical journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, the virus causing coronavirus disease-2019, is a biological hazard in workplaces. Thus, protective measures should be applied. Despite their potential role, the perspective of workplace representatives on coronavirus disease-2019 measures is rarely investigated. Aims: To assess the perspective of workplace union representatives on coronavirus disease-2019 measures in their workplaces in the first year of the pandemic in Turkey. Study Design: A descriptive observational study. Methods: This national descriptive study included workplace chief representatives of 33 workers’ unions. A 42-item electronic survey was used to collect data to evaluate the practice of job organization, social distancing and personal protective equipment use, sanitization, and occupational safety and health training. Results: The study included 509 workplace chief representatives’ responses. Results showed that several administrative measures, including suspending production or work, encouraging workers to take leave, implementing alternate work schedules, isolating any coronavirus disease-2019 case from other workers in a designated room, and avoiding face-to-face meetings, were not available in more than half of the workplaces. The mean number of available measures was significantly high (p < 0.001) in the industrial sector and workplaces with 250 or more workers. Almost all union representatives (98.8%) reported at least one diagnosis of coronavirus disease-2019 among workers, and 12.6% reported a positive history of coronavirus disease-2019-related mortality. The regression model for any history of coronavirus disease-2019 mortality in workers demonstrated a significantly increased association with workplaces with 250 or more workers compared with workplaces with less than 250 workers (odds ratio =2.99, 95% confidence interval =1.65-5.44, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results indicate failure in administrative measures and the need for improvement in medium- and small-sized workplaces and the non-industrial sector. All local and national stakeholders need to pay special attention to address these issues. Future studies should evaluate on-site coronavirus disease-2019 workplace measures and their effectiveness.
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.