SynthesisFrontiers in public health2024
Occupational accidents and the use of PPE: a global meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Active learning and sector-specific simulations mitigate the first-month injury risk in young workers.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of personal protective equipment in preventing occupational injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Case Report: Evaluating toxic encephalopathy from occupational 1,2-dichloroethane exposure: magnetic resonance imaging contributions.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
- Epidemiology of ocular trauma in limited-resource settings: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Causal factors and configuration paths for chemical occupational accidents: grounded theory and fsQCA analysis of 154 cases in China.Frontiers in public health · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Occupational accidents, despite continuous safety updates, are still a scourge in the occupational and forensic spheres, constituting, among other things, the subject of a large share of litigation. Demographic data can help to understand the areas where the application of health surveillance is lacking. This meta-analysis sets out to analyse data from studies on accidents at work, focusing on the correlation between the areas in which accidents occur and whether or not personal safety equipment is used, in relation to the different regulations in force. For the selection of the data, a systematic review was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines, with the primary objective of identifying the trend of occupational accidents in specific geographical areas, which differ in terms of the attention paid to preventive aspects. The data we highlighted showed, regarding the type of accident, substantial differences between low-income countries and industrialised countries (stratified according to the Human Development Index) and, an overall indifference as to whether or not individual safety devices were used, revealing that, despite the continuous normative evolution in the field of safety at work, even today, the investigative data on the actual application of the regulations, during accidents at work, is underestimated and little researched.
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.