ArticleBMJ open2026
Interventions aimed at improving psychosocial safety climate in the workplace: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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.
- Age-related differences in psychosocial risks among community mental health professionals.Frontiers in psychology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPsychosocial safety climate (PSC) is increasingly recognised as an important organisational resource for promoting mental health at work and preventing psychosocial risks, which are aspects of work design, organisation and management that could threaten employees' psychological or physical well-being. While substantial theoretical and empirical evidence supports the role of PSC as a protective factor, limited research has explored how PSC can be deliberately and sustainably enhanced through organisational interventions. This scoping review aims to map PSC-related interventions, synthesise how PSC is conceptualised and operationalised, and identify elements that studies have reported as contributing to strengthening PSC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow established methodological frameworks and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to systematically identify and synthesise studies describing organisational interventions related to PSC. A comprehensive search strategy will be implemented across several databases, including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ABI/INFORM and Business Source Premier. Eligible studies must describe, implement or evaluate interventions explicitly targeting PSC. Data on intervention types, mechanisms, outcomes and contextual factors will be extracted and narratively synthesised to address the descriptive research questions and map how PSC interventions have been conceptualised and implemented across organisational contexts. This protocol does not involve human participants. The review is not yet registered. Findings will inform future research and organisational practices related to PSC-focused interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review involves analysis of published literature only and does not require ethics approval. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant academic and professional conferences. Results will be reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and will inform the development of future organisational interventions aimed at enhancing PSC.
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.