ArticleScientific reports2024
A pilot study on psychosocial factors and perceptions of organizational health among a sample of U.S. waste workers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Solid waste workers encounter a number of occupational hazards that are likely to induce stress. Thus, there are likely to be psychosocial factors that also contribute to their overall perceptions of organizational health. However, attitudes regarding the aforementioned among solid waste workers' have not been assessed. This descriptive, cross-sectional pilot study operationalized the INPUTS Survey to determine workers' perceptions of organizational health and other psychosocial factors of work. Percentage and mean responses to each INPUTS domain are presented in accordance with their survey manual. Pearson's chi-squared tests were run on count data; Fisher's exact tests were run for count data with fewer than five samples. ANOVAs were run on the continuous items. Due to a relatively low sample size (N = 68), two-sided p values < 0.1 were considered statistically significant. Most solid waste worker participants reported high decision authority, that they perceived their management to prioritize workplace health and safety, and had high job satisfaction. However, perceptions of support for health outside of the realm of occupational safety and health was lower. Addressing traditional occupational health hazards continues to take precedence in this industry, with less of a focus on how the social determinants of health may impact workplace health.
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.