ArticleBMC public health2025
Consistency Analysis of Practice Orientation of the Healthy Enterprise Program in China.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe establishment of Healthy Enterprises is a critical element of occupational health protection and a key initiative within the Healthy China Action. This study aimed to analyze the action patterns of enterprises across various industries in implementing best practices for Healthy Enterprises and to assess the consistency of their positive orientation.
methodsText analysis was used to examine the summary materials of 300 outstanding Healthy Enterprise cases selected by government authorities. Following the pre-processing of the text specifications using a text segmentation tool, the positive-oriented consistency of Healthy Enterprise practices across varying risk profiles was comprehensively explored through the examination of word frequency, a co-word matrix, and topic model analyses. Enterprises were categorized into high and low-risk groups based on the classification and management of occupational injury risks.
resultsEnterprises across various industries leveraged "management" as a pivotal instrument in fostering and developing healthy enterprises within their organizational framework. High-risk sector entities prioritized the prevention and control of occupational diseases and hazards in the production process, bolstering supervision over workplaces, facilities, employees, and training. Conversely, low-risk sector entities placed a premium on cultivating a health-centric cultural ambiance and service provisions, thereby exhibiting an obvious advantage in promoting organizational structures and augmenting employee health literacy. The co-word matrix analysis revealed that the key point of "management" in high-risk industries centered on hazards and facilities in production. Meanwhile, "management" in low-risk industries focused on services, hygiene, environment, training, activities, etc. The keywords within the Specification guideline were categorized into 3 themes: healthy workplace management, employee health services, specialized care for distinct demographics and a health-conscious culture. Enterprises in both risk groups encapsulated all pivotal facets related to the theme in terms of practices, effectiveness and inspiration, reflecting good consistency in action practices.
conclusionThe commendable implementation of the Healthy Enterprise Program demonstrates a positive orientation and consistency in executing health promotion initiatives based on the standardized guidelines, which is crucial for fostering a health-supportive environment and effectively protecting the well-being of the workforce.
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.