ArticleHeliyon2024
Psychosocial risks of workers in the plywood industry: A cross-sectional study in the Ecuadorian Amazon region.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of the process of determining essential hazardous psychosocial factors of employee stress risk.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work assessed the psychosocial risks of 124 workers from the plywood industry in Ecuador's Amazon region. Two psychosocial risk assessment (PRA) methods were selected due to their widespread use in Ecuadorian organisations: FPSICO from the Spanish National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the "Psychosocial Risk Assessment Questionnaire" (PRAQ) from the Ecuadorian Labour Ministry. Therefore, two surveys of 89 and 58 items were applied to evaluate nine scales and eight risk dimensions for FPSICO and PRAQ, respectively. Results show that according to FPSICO, the main psychosocial risks were detected in the scales of working time (WT), variety and content (VC), and workload (WL), with a prevalence of 34.8 % and 41.7 %. For PRAQ, the margin of action and control (D4), load and work rate (D1), and leadership (D3) were the most affected dimensions, with a risk prevalence between 29.1 % and 43.6 %. Although there is a lower risk prevalence in the rest of the scales and dimensions assessed, improvement actions are needed in the short term. Furthermore, the findings suggest an association between gender and risk prevalence, especially in the dimensions of Leadership (D3), Skills development (D2), and Self-perceived health (D8.8), where being a woman increases the likelihood of suffering from these conditions by up to three times. In addition, a brief comparative analysis was conducted, looking for coincidences in the scales that each PRA instrument assesses and the prevalence of the psychosocial risks detected.
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.