ArticlePloS one2026
Predicting unsafe behaviour from the objective assessment of fatigue manifestation among scaffolders: Evidence from a Quasi-experimental simulation study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe burden of scaffolding-related accidents was growing. Individual attributes like unsafe behaviour and fatigue have been identified as the important precursors. Understanding the relationship between fatigue manifestation and unsafe behaviour is crucial for developing effective accident prevention protocols. This study aimed to determine the relationship between unsafe behaviour and manifestation of physical and cognitive fatigue during scaffold erection task among scaffolders.
methodsA total of 86 scaffolders were recruited into a quasi-experiment with one group pre-post design. Fatigue manifestation was measured objectively at pre-and post-exposure to scaffolding task, employing an assessment protocol consisted of 7 tests. Two fatigue dimensions were evaluated: Physical fatigue (musculoskeletal capacity by hand grip strength, prone plank, trunk flexor endurance and trunk lateral endurance test; postural stability by one leg standing test; joint flexibility by sit and reach test) and cognitive fatigue (simple reaction time test). Throughout the simulation scaffold erection task, unsafe behaviour was rated according to the non-compliance to standard safety protocol. Other independent variables of sociodemographic factors and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score were also included.
resultsCorrelation analysis was significant (p < 0.001) for unsafe behaviour with dominant-hand grip strength (r = -0.57), one leg standing duration with eyes closed (r = -0.69), prone plank duration (r = -0.56), trunk flexor endurance duration (r = -0.61) and reaction time (r = -0.47). Multiple linear regression analysis confirmed the significant predictors of rate of unsafe behaviour including reaction time, one leg standing duration when eye closed, trunk flexor endurance duration and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score.
conclusionThese findings will facilitate the development of scaffolding safety protocol for accident prevention, assist industry managers and regulatory decision-makers to govern workers' safe behaviour via the fatigue mitigation approach.
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.