MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171963850 · doi:10.1002/ajim.20193

The cost effectiveness of occupational health interventions: Preventing occupational back pain

2005· article· en· W2171963850 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Supriya Lahiri, Pia Markkanen, Charles Levenstein

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilWashington State Department of Labor and Industries
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineCost effectivenessOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational medicineEnvironmental healthPoison controlIntervention (counseling)Injury preventionPhysical therapyGerontologyNursingOccupational exposureRisk analysis (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Occupational back pain exacts a toll on society with concomitant economic losses; it is imperative to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce the relevant ergonomic stressors at work. This study estimates and evaluates the average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) of specific interventions for the prevention of occupationally induced back pain for the World Health Organization (WHO) defined subregions of the world. METHODS: Four back-pain interventions were selected from the literature: training (T), engineering controls (EC), engineering controls and training (EC&T), and a comprehensive full ergonomics program (EP) for evaluation. A simulation model for a 100-year time horizon, developed by the WHO CHOICE initiative project was used to estimate the effectiveness of the interventions in healthy year equivalents. The intervention costs were adjusted for all WHO subregions. RESULTS: In all of the subregions, training was the most cost-effective with CERs varying from 74 dollars per healthy life years gained in the subregion comprising of Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Yemen (EMROD) to approximately 567 dollars in the subregion covering Canada and the United States (AMROA). Training is considered to be very cost-effective and would be the first choice option where resources are scarce. However, the overall effectiveness of training is low. Although other interventions such as engineering controls and total ergonomic interventions are relatively more expensive, the addition to health outcome through these interventions is much higher. The difference in the CERs for training and other engineering controls and full ergonomic interventions is relatively small for most of the industrialized regions of the world. It is clear from the ranked CERs and incremental CERs over the different subregions that in most of the industrialized regions of the world additional resources, if they become available, should go straight to the full ergonomics program. CONCLUSIONS: The model results based on CERs show that worker training is a low cost, feasible first step toward reducing back pain/injury incidence. However, all of the average CERs for the different interventions, for each of the regions, fall well within their GDP per capita estimates [World Bank, 2001]. According to the WHO Commission on Macroeconomics and Health any intervention that costs less than three times GDP per capita for saving a healthy year equivalent should be considered worthwhile and good value for money [WHO, 2002]. Given this criterion, the engineering controls interventions as well as the full ergonomics program look very cost effective for all of the WHO subregions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial MedicineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207