Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41500571›Full record

ArticleIndustrial health2026

Participatory action-oriented training implemented across various workplaces: a scoping review protocol.

Yeon-Ha Kim, Etsuko Yoshikawa, Toru Yoshikawa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Industrial health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yeon-Ha KimDepartment of Nursing, Korea National University of Transportation, Korea.
Etsuko YoshikawaDepartment of Nursing, Japanese Red Cross College of Nursing, Japan.
Toru YoshikawaResearch Center for Overwork-Related Disorders (RECORDs), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Participatory Action-Oriented Training (PAOT) is a structured, worker-centered approach designed to improve workplace safety and health. However, its applicability across different contexts remains unclear. This scoping review aims to systematically analyze the existing literature on PAOT, focusing on its utilization with various populations, contexts, and methodological approaches. Using the population-concept-context (PCC) framework, this review defines the population as workers, community members, or managers participating in PAOT; the concept as PAOT; and the context as workplaces, communities, agriculture, and healthcare settings. Literature, from January 2000 until onward, will be searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Korea Education and Research Information Sharing Service, Korean Studies Information Service System, DBpia, National Digital Science Digital Library, and Japan Medical Abstracts Society. Study selection will be performed independently by three reviewers and the overall review process will be presented transparently in a PRISMA-ScR flowchart. A comprehensive mapping of the PAOT applications will be conducted based on key variables such as study design, implementation context, training components of the action checklist, and improvement outcomes. Since the 1980s, PAOT has been applied in various sectors including small enterprises, agriculture, communities, and healthcare. This review will highlight trends and gaps to support future research and practice.

Indexed as

Inservice TrainingOccupational HealthWorkplaceHumansResearch DesignScoping Reviews as TopicWorking ConditionsOccupational healthParticipatory researchProtocolScoping ReviewTraining

Identifiers

PMID41500571
PMCPMC13387838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.