Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39802321›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Behind the good of digital tools for occupational safety and health: a scoping review of ethical issues surrounding the use of the internet of things.

Maéva El Bouchikhi, Sophie Weerts, Christine Clavien

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Maéva El BouchikhiSwiss Graduate School of Public Administration, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sophie WeertsSwiss Graduate School of Public Administration, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Christine ClavienInstitute For Ethics, History, and the Humanities, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The internet of things (IoT) is increasingly used for occupational safety and health (OSH) purposes in private and public organisations. Current practices and regulations are unclear, and some stakeholders raised concerns about deploying this technology at work. Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR checklist, we reviewed the main opportunities and ethical issues raised by using IoT devices for OSH purposes, as discussed in the academic literature. We searched peer-reviewed papers from 2008 to September 2023, written in English and available in "Web of Science," "PhilPapers," and "Google Scholar." We found 1,495 articles, of which 61 fulfilled the selection criteria. We classified ethical topics discussed in the papers in a coherent description frame. Results: We obtained 6 overarching categories: "ethical opportunities," "surveillance and problematic data re-purposing," "difficulty to inform, consult, and obtain consent from employees," "unintended and unpredictable adverse effects," "suboptimal data management," and "external factors that are conducive to ethical issues." The resulting list of problematic issues is unexpectedly furnished and substantial. Such a list provides information and guidance for those who wish to develop evaluation frameworks in line with a preventive regulatory approach. It also informs policymakers and practitioners about the governance of such tools for ensuring more OSH.

Indexed as

Internet of ThingsOccupational HealthHumansadverse effectsethical issuesinternet of thingsoccupational safety and healthopportunitiessurveillance

Identifiers

PMID39802321
PMCPMC11719680

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.