Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38784580›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2024

Effectiveness of Occupational Safety and Health interventions: a long way to go.

Gaia Vitrano, Guido J L Micheli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Gaia VitranoDepartment of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Guido J L MicheliDepartment of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) has become an area of increasing concern for organizations and institutions. As it evolves, it has gradually posed ongoing challenges, becoming more complex, for organizations. Consequently, more comprehensive studies are required to advance academic and institutional research. From this perspective, this study aims to gather research contributions on the effectiveness of existing interventions for OSH improvement and identify areas for further exploration. Methods: According to the nature of scientific literature, the overall process of a literature review was investigated following an integrative approach, which involved searching for, selecting, and analyzing various literature in a creative and integrated manner, without a predefined structure. Results: The analysis suggests that there is room for improvement in understanding the effectiveness of OSH interventions and more concrete guidance is still desirable. Based on the literature, some research areas for future developments in OSH interventions are identified. One potential area to explore further is fostering human-centered technological development and a more conscious network of stakeholders, with higher coordination, shared knowledge, and open communication. Implications: Focusing on the proposed directions will support scholars and practitioners in pursuing continuous OSH improvement through more effective and well-grounded workplace interventions and encourage organizations to be proactive in daily OSH management.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthHumansWorkplaceeffectivenessintegrative reviewinterventionsliterature reviewmanagementoccupational healthoccupational safetyresearch agenda

Identifiers

PMID38784580
PMCPMC11111875

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.