ArticleJournal of occupational health2024
Exploring wearable technology use and importance of health monitoring in the hazardous occupations of first responders and professional drivers.
Article in Journal of occupational health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technology-Driven Ergonomics: A Narrative Review of Innovative Strategies for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders in Modern Work Environments.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Ethical Use of Wearable Device Data in Occupational Settings: Perspectives From the Fire Service.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesHazardous materials (HAZMAT) pose risks to the health and safety of professionals involved with transportation and emergency responses. Two distinct occupational groups that encounter HAZMAT events are first responders and professional drivers. Wearable technology is a tool that can assist with monitoring the health of professionals involved in HAZMAT events. The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the perceptions of first responders and professional drivers on wearable technology and attitudes toward health monitoring.
methodsA survey was administered to first responders (n = 112) and professional drivers (n = 218). Statistical approaches included bivariate analysis, latent class analysis, logistic regression analysis, and path analysis for the variables of interest.
resultsThere were significant differences between the groups in perceptions of the benefits of monitoring certain health indicators. Professional drivers were more likely to have a history of wearable technology use compared with first responders (odds ratio [OR] = 10.1; 95% CI, 4.42-22.9), reported greater exposure to HAZMAT (OR = 4.32; 95% CI, 2.24-8.32), and were more willing to have their health data monitored by someone other than themselves (OR = 9.27; 95% CI, 3.67-23.4). A multinomial regression model revealed that occupation was not a significant predictor of class preference for acceptance of monitoring specific health indicators.
conclusionsOccupation appeared to be important but further analysis uncovered that characteristics of individuals within the occupations were more salient to the use of wearable technology. HAZMAT exposure, someone else monitoring health data, and experience with wearable technology use were found to be important factors for perceptions about benefits of health monitoring with wearable technology.
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.