Have companies improved their health and safety approaches over the last decade? A longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Workplace level health and safety (H&S) policies, practices, and attitudes were compared longitudinally in 120 manufacturing firms. METHODS: A mailed questionnaire for worker and management representatives in the sampled worksites was first completed in 1990 [Shannon et al. (1996) Am J Ind Med 29:258-268]. Workplaces that were still in business in 2001 were re-surveyed to assess change over time in key variables previously found to be related to lost-time injury (LTI) rates. RESULTS: Several variables differed between 1990 and 2001, e.g., increase in safety training, lower turnover rate, and more management involvement in H&S. Other variables previously associated with higher LTI rates also were more prevalent in 2001: more work stoppages for H&S issues, greater perception of risk from hazards, and an increase in workers' lobbying management for H&S improvements. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be greater awareness of H&S issues today, and a movement to upper management becoming more involved in H&S and delegating less authority to individual workers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".