ArticlePloS one2025
Labour and social protection gaps impacting the health and well-being of workers in non-standard employment: An international comparative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Power, Politics, and Policy in the Making of Health Inequities: An Empirical Study of Equity-Oriented Policy Actors in Canada.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026Article
- The Epidemiology of Working Life: Reorganizing Occupational Health Science Around Work-Structured Exposure Systems.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical and socioeconomic factors associated with return-to-work after upper and lower limb fractures.BMC public health · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorld economies increasingly rely on non-standard employment arrangements, which has been linked to ill health. While work and employment conditions are recognized structural determinants of health and health equity, policies aiming to protect workers from negative implications predominantly focus on standard employment arrangements and the needs of workers in non-standard employment may be neglected. The aim of this study is to explore workers' experiences of gaps in labour regulations and social protections and its influence on their health and well-being across 6 countries with differing policy approaches: Belgium, Canada, Chile, Spain, Sweden, and the United States.
methods250 semi-structured interviews with workers in non-standard employment were analyzed thematically using a multiple case-study approach.
resultsThere are notable differences in workers' rights to protection across the countries. However, participants across all countries experienced similar challenges including employment instability, income inadequacy and limited rights and protection, due to policy-related gaps and access-barriers. In response, they resorted to individual resources and strategies, struggled to envision supportive policies, and expressed low expectations of changes by employers and policymakers.
conclusionsPolicy gaps threaten workers' health and well-being across all study countries, irrespective of the levels of labour market regulations and social protections. Workers in non-standard employment disproportionately endure economic risks, which may increase social and health inequality. The study highlights the need to improve social protection for this vulnerable population.
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.