ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2025
Defining Sex- and Age-Specific Initial Stay Times for Continuous Heavy-Intensity Work in Hot Environments Before Heat-Mitigation Controls Are Implemented-Part B.
Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 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.
- Limited Agreement Between Perceptual and Physiological Heat Strain at Initial Stay Times for Continuous Work in the Heat Before Heat Alleviation Controls.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026Article
- Timing of Work-Rest Implementation Influences Worker Productivity Under Heat Stress: Evidence for Initial Stay Time-Based Scheduling.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of Initial Stay Time and Work-Rest Scheduling Over Consecutive Moderate-Intensity Workdays in Hot Environments in Young and Older Males and Females.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleIndustry guidelines recommend work-rest schedules to prevent unsafe core temperature elevations (> 38.0°C or > Δ1.0°C above baseline resting) in an "average" worker exposed to occupational heat stress. While permissible initial work durations (initial stay times [IST]) before implementing rest schedules have been suggested, existing data are limited to moderate-intensity efforts.
objectivesThe objective of this study was to assess whether factors of sex and age influence IST during heavy-intensity work.
methodsWe assessed work durations before reaching unsafe core temperature thresholds (i.e., > 38.0°C or > Δ1.0°C above baseline resting) among young (18-30 years) and older (50-69 years) males and females during simulated heavy-intensity work at 26°C, 29°C, and 32°C wet-bulb globe temperatures (WBGT).
findingsThe likelihood of surpassing a core temperature of 38.0°C significantly increased at 32°C WBGT (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.0 [1.5, 2.7], p = 0.001), but not at 29°C WBGT (1.1 [0.9, 1.4], p = 0.342), compared to 26°C WBGT. Median (interquartile range) durations to reach 38.0°C across groups were 32 (23-52), 29 (23-47), and 26 (18-35) minutes at 26°C, 29°C, and 32°C WBGT, respectively. The likelihood of reaching Δ1.0°C above baseline resting significantly increased at both 32°C (3.8 [2.6, 5.4], p < 0.001) and 29°C WBGT (1.5 [1.1, 2.0], p < 0.001), with median durations being 55 (40-82), 42 (35-56), and 33 (29-42) min, respectively. Older females were more likely to reach 38.0°C (2.4 [1.3, 4.3], p = 0.004) and Δ1.0°C above baseline resting (2.5 [1.4, 4.7], p = 0.003) compared to young males. No other sex- or age-related differences were detected (p > 0.145). IMPACT: These findings highlight the heightened vulnerability of older females during heavy-intensity occupational heat stress, emphasizing the need for tailored guidelines to ensure equitable workforce protection.
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.