ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2025
Predicting workplace absenteeism using machine learning: a pilot study in occupational health.
Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Antecedents of Long‑Term Work Disability After Mental Health-Related Sickness Absence: The Role of Occupational Health Care Pathways.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorkplace absenteeism represents a significant challenge for organizations and occupational health practitioners, with substantial implications for productivity, healthcare costs, and employee well-being. Traditional approaches to absenteeism management remain largely reactive, highlighting the need for predictive models that enable proactive interventions.
objectiveTo develop and validate machine learning models for predicting workplace absenteeism patterns and identifying risk factors associated with prolonged absence in a pilot study framework, thereby demonstrating feasibility for evidence-based occupational health interventions.
methodsThis pilot study employed machine learning algorithms on a publicly available workplace absenteeism dataset from a Brazilian company (2007-2010) obtained from the UCI Machine Learning Repository. The dataset comprised 740 instances with 19 variables including demographic characteristics, clinical indicators (BMI, ICD-10 coded absence reasons), and occupational factors. Random Forest and Gradient Boosting algorithms were implemented for both classification of prolonged absences and regression of absence duration. Statistical outliers (> 30 h, 3.8% of cases) were excluded to focus on typical absence patterns.
resultsThe developed models demonstrated feasibility for workplace absenteeism prediction within this pilot framework. The Random Forest classification model achieved 84% accuracy (AUC = 0.89) for distinguishing between typical and prolonged absences. For duration prediction of typical absences (≤ 30 h), the Random Forest regression model yielded R² = 0.13, RMSE = 3.93 h, and MAE = 2.37 h. Key predictors included absence reason (ICD-10 classification), body mass index, and workload metrics, with notable interactions between workload intensity and specific absence categories.
conclusionsThis pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of machine learning approaches for occupational health management by enabling identification of employees at risk for prolonged absenteeism. While showing promise for supporting personalized health interventions and resource allocation, implementation requires external validation across multiple organizations and careful consideration of ethical implications regarding employee privacy and algorithmic fairness.
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.