ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
"
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Occupational Risk Perception and Utilization of Personal Protective Equipment Among Informal Auto-Artisans in Ghana: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection: "2025
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Occupational injuries (OIs) remain a major public health concern in the construction industry, especially in developing countries where underreporting poses significant challenges. The belief systems of construction artisans may shape their perceptions of workplace hazards and safety practices, yet these dynamics remain underexplored in Nigeria. Hence, this study explored the beliefs about causes and prevention of OIs among artisans in the informal sector of the construction industry in Osun State, Nigeria. Methods: Twelve focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted in Osun State, Nigeria, with six FGDs each held with bricklayers and carpenters. Each FGD comprised five to seven participants. A semi-structured FGD guide was employed to moderate the discussions. Each session was facilitated by a moderator and a note-taker. Verbatim transcription was done for FGD audios, the transcripts were coded and thematically analysed using the ATLAS.ti software. Relevant direct quotations illustrating the themes and subthemes were cited accordingly. Results: Seventy artisans participated in the FGDs and all participants were male. The findings identified a range of beliefs about injury causation, with a strong emphasis on spiritual beliefs. These included notions of predestination by God and enchantment. However, a less common belief suggested that adherence to safety precautions could prevent injuries. Also, some participants expressed a nuanced combination of these perspectives. Perceptions of injury prevention were reflected in various subthemes, including the importance of prayers, avoiding conflicts, or taking jobs from others, maintaining safe housekeeping practices, government provision or subsidization of personal protective equipment (PPE) and its correct usage, provision of safety training and effective supervision. Conclusion: Workplace injuries among artisans were attributed to spiritual factors, limited access to safety equipment, and inadequate compliance with safety measures. Addressing these challenges requires culturally sensitive interventions, considering the perceptions of the artisans, alongside providing subsidized PPE, durable tools, targeted training, and effective supervision to foster a safer working environment and minimize injury risks.
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.