SynthesisAnnals of work exposures and health2025
Deconstruction of farm machine-related safety interventions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.
Synthesis in Annals of work exposures and 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
introductionAgricultural workplaces have a high number of incidents and fatalities, with the majority occurring from machinery use. Farmers' behaviour plays a critical role in maintaining safety, as improper or unsafe practices often lead to injuries and fatalities. This review categorises interventions targeting farm machine safety, examining both the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used and their reported outcomes to understand how the techniques influence safety practices and outcomes on farms.
methodsThe systematic review is reported in accordance with the Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Seven electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published before June 2024, and the quality of included studies was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Analysis of intervention behavioural components was guided by the behaviour change wheel framework and BCT taxonomy (v1). The findings were synthesised using a narrative review.
resultsNine studies were included and a total of 21 BCTs were identified. The most frequently coded BCTs were 4.1 (instruction on how to perform the behaviour), 10.8 (incentive [outcome]), and 16.3 (vicarious consequences) (each n = 6). Reported outcomes included reductions in injury rates, improved adoption of safety devices, implementation of safety measures, and positive shifts in safety norms and perceptions. However, due to variations in intervention design and reporting, assessing the direct impact of specific BCTs on these outcomes proved challenging. DISCUSSION: The use of BCT taxonomy provided a common language for describing intervention components and enabled the standardisation of intervention content analysis. While patterns were observed regarding the commonly used BCTs, their implementation and outcomes, the heterogeneity and limited details provided by studies limited our ability to discern their effectiveness. Providing (i) greater transparency in reporting active intervention components and (ii) clearer connections between components and specific outcomes, will enable enhanced comparisons of future studies, and facilitate a greater understanding of how to support safe machine-related behaviours on farms.
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.