Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38701168›Full record

ReviewWork (Reading, Mass.)2024

The evolution of new and emerging occupational health and safety risks: A qualitative review.

Maria Lindholm, Arto Reiman, Sari Tappura

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2024. 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

3 authors.

Maria LindholmTampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Arto ReimanUniversity of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Sari TappuraFinnish Safety and Chemicals Agency (Tukes), Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWork itself and occupational health and safety (OHS) have evolved through industrial revolutions and will also continue to evolve in the future.

objectiveThe aim of this qualitative literature review was to examine how the scientific discussion on new and emerging risks (NERs) related to OHS has evolved in recent decades in developed and newly industrialized countries.

methodsA search of the Scopus database yielded 34 articles published before 2000 and from 2020 onwards.

resultsA review of the articles identified NERs themes related to changes in work patterns, changing workforce and growth in some sectors, climate change, new materials or increased use of materials, new technology and technological development, and viruses. In both article collection periods, possible adverse OHS effects discussed included musculoskeletal disorders, exposure to toxic agents, chemical compounds and hazardous materials, increased stress, increased likelihood of errors and accidents, psychosocial problems, mental fatigue, and increases in work-related illnesses and accidents.

conclusionsThe articles published during both periods discussed similar themes. The main differences were regarding specific time-related cases, such as climate change and COVID-19. Based on the findings of this review, points to consider in OHS management and future studies are discussed.

Indexed as

COVID-19Occupational HealthClimate ChangeHumansQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Changeclimate changehuman factors and ergonomicsmaterialstechnologyviruses

Identifiers

PMID38701168
PMCPMC11491999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.