ArticleBMC public health2025
COVID-19 workplace countermeasures that occupational physicians could not change in Japan: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, information and circumstances changed from moment to moment, including the accumulation of scientific knowledge, the emergence of variants, social tolerance, and government policy. Therefore, it was important to adapt workplace countermeasures punctually and flexibly based on scientific evidence and according to circumstances. However, there has been no assessment of changes in workplace countermeasures. With a view toward preparedness for future pandemics, we surveyed COVID-19 workplace countermeasures that occupational physicians considered as needing to be changed but went unchanged.
methodsWe invited 685 professional occupational physicians certified by Japan Society for Occupational Health to complete an online questionnaire by sending postcards with QR codes. The main questions concerned countermeasures that the participants wanted to change but could not. The survey period was from February 21 to April 28, 2022. The responses were analyzed using the KJ method.
resultsOf the 168 invitees (24.5%) who responded to the survey, 125 reported countermeasures that needed to be changed (total count: 254). The responses were categorized into basic systems, occupational health services, workplace countermeasures, vaccines, and incidents, with a code count of 7, 8,147, 10, and 82, respectively. The type of countermeasure was 115 for countermeasures to be strengthened (CBS), 110 for measures to be mitigated (CBM), and 29 for neither.
conclusionsOften-mentioned CBS were increased teleworking, strengthened ventilation, smoking cessation, and promotion of vaccines. Often-mentioned CBM were relaxation of protective equipment rules, discontinued environmental disinfection, and shorted isolation and reinstatement. In the early pandemic phases, CBSs were frequently mentioned, whereas CBMs were featured more prominently in the latter phases. The survey revealed countermeasures that occupational physicians thought needed to be changed but were not changed in practice. For future responses to emerging and reemerging infectious diseases, it will be necessary to establish rules compatible with flexible modification of workplace countermeasures in response to changing circumstances.
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.