ArticleBMJ public health2025
Occupational heat-related illness risk screening protocols for aviation: a systematic review.
Article in BMJ 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Aircrew are subject to thermal stress and heat-related illness (HRI). Published screening methods and safety thresholds remain limited. The objective of this review was to evaluate the available evidence, approaches and guidelines regarding HRI screening tools in aircrew and analogue occupational and athletic cohorts to create a broad compendium of relevant tools for aviation safety decision-makers which establish risk stratification. Design: A systematic literature review was conducted through 28 July 2025, of manuscripts and technical documents that reported HRI risk screening approaches. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and appraised risk of bias. Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus were searched. Eligibility criteria: Extrinsic and intrinsic factors checklists, protocols, diagrams, algorithms and screening approaches for HRI risk stratification and safety thresholds within occupational settings were included. Cohorts under 18 years of age and abstracts were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis: 3472 reports were identified and 37 were included in the final analysis. Common approaches relied on wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT), workload assessment and personal protective equipment used. WBGT thresholds ranged 27-32°C for extreme risk and 23-31°C for high risk. Identified tools used 19 common domains to establish risk. Data were insufficient to identify a singular ideal screening approach. Conclusions: This systematic review addresses knowledge gaps regarding occupational HRI risk screening protocols for use towards aviation workers. Limitations included lack of generalisability, risk definition variability and conflicting published author assumptions regarding intrinsic factors considered.
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.