ReviewJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2025
Risk assessment and management of chemical hazards for pregnant workers: a qualitative review of guidance from EU member states.
Review in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality of guidelines for the management and prevention of occupational risks during pregnancy: a systematic quality assessment using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II).Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2026Review
- Policy Analysis of Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Legislation and Regulations: Workplace Protections for Reproductive Health and Fetal Development.New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS · 2026Article
- Particulate Matter Emissions of Turkish Cigarettes in Comparison to German Brands - An Aerosol Spectrometric Study.Tobacco use insights · 2026Article
- Workplace risk assessment criteria for pregnant workers exposed to physical exertion and biological and chemical hazards.Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundExposure to workplace chemicals can pose serious risks to reproductive health. The European Union's Pregnant Workers Directive requires risk assessments but lacks clear guidelines for assessing chemical reproductive hazards in workplaces.
aimsThis study aims to review how EU member states implement the Pregnant Workers Directive by analysing national guidance documents and relevant literature.
methodsA qualitative review was conducted, combining a systematic literature search with outreach to EU national experts to gather relevant guidance documents. Thematic synthesis identified guiding principles for implementing maternity protection for chemical exposures.
resultsTwo main themes were identified: the need for a broad perspective and for certainty in risk assessment. The broad perspective stresses the importance of considering all reproductive hazards, not limited to those listed in the EU Directive and inclusion of male workers and the preconception period, and the potential adverse socio-economic consequences of applied protective measures. The need for certainty highlights the challenges in reliable risk assessments, due to lack of knowledge about chemicals' hazardous properties, dose-response relationships and the level of worker exposure. These themes reveal the complexity of implementing effective maternity protection and the need for improved guidelines across the EU.
conclusionsThis study calls for a unified approach to reproductive health protection, extending beyond pregnancy to include also preconception and paternal exposures. The findings highlight the need to support practitioners in the risk assess process at workplaces in the EU by providing a framework for the assessment of reproductive hazards and determining protective measures.
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.