ArticleHealth promotion international2023
Process evaluation of workplace health promotion in a sheltered workplace: a care ethics perspective.
Article in Health promotion international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the potential health benefits of workplace health promotion for employees in sheltered workplaces, participation is often limited. The aim of this study was (i) to understand this limited participation, and (ii) to find opportunities for adapting workplace health promotion, such that it better meets the needs of the target population. A responsive process evaluation of an extensive multi-component workplace health promotion program targeting lifestyle behaviors, financial behaviors, literacy and citizenship, was performed in a large, sheltered workplace in the Netherlands (>3500 employees). To understand the limited participation, interviews with employees (n = 8), supervisors (n = 7) and managers (n = 2), and 10 participant observations were performed. To find opportunities for improving workplace health promotion in the sheltered workplace, 7 dialogs with employees were performed (n = 30). The interview data on the barriers for participation were evaluated through the lens of care ethics, as this allowed to understand the role of various stakeholders in the limited participation, as well as the indirect role of the institutional context. Findings showed that participation in workplace health promotion could increase if it is organized in a way that it encourages employees to work on health together, allow to tailor activities to different needs and capabilities of employees, and connects activities to employees' daily lives. A strength of this study is that the responsive process evaluation focused both on barriers for participation, as well as on opportunities to increase participation.
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.