A Study on the Comprehensive and Integrated Workplace Safety and Health Services in Singapore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of comprehensiveness and integration of workplace safety and health (WSH) services (safety, occupational health, and well-being) in Singapore. METHODS: Thirty workplaces from five different sectors comprising more than 28,000 workers were assessed using three custom-developed tools. RESULTS: One quarter of the workplaces have applied the principles of comprehensive and integrated WSH. Among those that managed WSH comprehensively, workers were 4.4 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33 to 8.25) more likely to be proud to work for their company, 7.4 times (95% CI, 3.96 to 13.90) more likely to be satisfied with their current job, and 1.7 times (95% CI, 1.21 to 2.32) more likely to balance the demands of work and home. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to enhance awareness and education on comprehensive and integrated WSH in Singapore companies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".