ArticleArhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju2025
Workplace risk assessment criteria for pregnant workers exposed to physical exertion and biological and chemical hazards.
Article in Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Workplace risk assessment criteria for pregnant workers in the EU remain inconsistent and poorly harmonised, with notable gaps in practical guidelines for occupational health physicians (OHPs). This regulatory ambiguity could lead to either insufficient protection or unnecessary exclusion of pregnant workers from the workplace, with significant implications for maternal and foetal health, as well as healthcare and social security systems. The aim of this study was to propose common, harmonised criteria for workplace risk assessment in healthy pregnant workers exposed to physical exertion and biological and chemical hazards. The criteria were developed through structured expert consultation involving occupational and sports medicine specialists from the Croatian Society of Occupational Health. To that end, we compiled and presented relevant legal and scientific literature, which served as the basis for discussion. Expert opinion was obtained via an anonymous online questionnaire administered during a structured expert workshop. The proposed criteria are based on the CLP Regulation (EC No. 1272/2008) classification of reprotoxic substances, identification of key biological hazards (e.g., cytomegalovirus, parvovirus B19, rubella virus, varicella-zoster virus, and
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.