SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
Impact of personal protective equipment in preventing occupational injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Occupational injuries remain a significant public health concern across diverse industries, with personal protective equipment (PPE) widely advocated to mitigate risk. However, the real-world effectiveness of PPE and factors influencing its use require synthesis. Our objective is to determine whether the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces the occurrence of occupational injuries among workers in high-risk industries. Methods: A comprehensive search was done to include all relevant studies published between January 2000 and June 2025 in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase, following the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. Studies that met the criteria included adult workers in construction, mining, manufacturing, agriculture, or related fields. They examined PPE interventions (helmets, gloves, goggles, respirators, safety shoes, high-visibility apparel, and harnesses) and reported on injuries and compliance measures. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed in R to pool injury prevalence, PPE effectiveness (ORs), and compliance rates; heterogeneity was quantified via Results: Eighteen cross-sectional studies ( Conclusion: PPE use is associated with lower odds of occupational injury, and the prevalence of occupational injuries is higher when PPE is available, properly fitted, and supported by training and supervision. However, low compliance was driven primarily by supply and ergonomic factors. Integrated strategies encompassing reliable PPE provisioning, user-centered design, comprehensive training, and organizational commitment are essential to enhance workplace safety.
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.