Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37313152›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Safety sign comprehension of fiberboard industry employees.

Celal Gungor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Celal GungorDepartment of Forest Industrial Enginnering, Faculty of Forestry, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Safety signs are very important communication tools for accident prevention, fire safety, health hazard information, and emergency evacuation. They are helpful when properly designed and understood by employees. The purpose of the present study was to investigate fiberboard industry employees' understanding of safety signs. 139 participants were asked to indicate the meaning of a series of 22 commonly used safety signs. The mean comprehension score for 22 signs was 66.6% (min. 22.5% and max. 98.6%). The mean score for warning signs was the lowest, prohibition signs was the highest. Poor comprehension score (less than 40%) was noted for the toxic material, automated external heart defibrillator, overhead obstacle, and disconnect mains plug from electrical outlet signs. These low comprehension scores indicate that some symbols may not effectively convey the message to the audience. Safety practitioners and trainers should pay more attention to teach the actual meaning of those signs.

Indexed as

Accident preventionFiberboard industrySafetySafety signsSign comprehension

Identifiers

PMID37313152
PMCPMC10258412

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.