ArticleJournal of agricultural safety and health2022
A Test of Social Cognitive Theory to Increase Hearing Protection Use in Swine Buildings.
Article in Journal of agricultural safety and health, 2022. 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.
- Interventions to prevent noise-induced hearing loss in farmworkers: a scoping review.International journal of audiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Farming ranks among the top occupations for which workers are at risk for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL), an irreversible yet preventable condition. Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs) (i.e., earmuffs and ear plugs) are effective at preventing expo- sure to noise; however, few farmers report consistent use. The purpose of this study was to test an intervention based on Social Cognitive Theory with interactive smartphone technology to increase the use of HPDs among swine facility workers. A pilot, quasi-experimental study was implemented among 72 younger adult swine workers. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups. Group 1 received HPDs (e.g., earmuffs and ear plugs). Group 2 received the same HPDs as Group 1 and was also instructed to use a smartphone application to track their use of hearing protection for 60 days. Group 3 received the HPDs and instructions on using a smartphone app for tracking the use of hearing protection and setting daily goals for hearing protection use. Use of hearing protection was assessed via an online survey prior to the intervention (i.e., "baseline"), immediately after the post-intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. Compared to baseline use, all three groups reported increased use of hearing protection immediately post-intervention. However, this increase was not maintained at a 3-month follow-up for two of the study groups. Group 3 (HPD, tracking, and goal-setting app) showed the greatest increase in the use of HPDs from baseline to immediate post-intervention; however, Group 1 (HPD only) showed the greatest sustained increase from baseline to the 3-month follow-up. Modifying the environment by supplying HPDs was effective in increasing HPD use among swine facility workers. Improving access to hearing protection devices alone may lead to sustained changes in behavior.
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.