Health and safety training and prevention of hand-arm vibration syndrome through education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to hand operated vibrating tools in the construction industry places workers at risk for developing hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS), which is a common occupational disease. OBJECTIVE: To outline health and safety training obtained by construction workers and to assess which factors influence anti-vibration (AV) glove utilization following an educational intervention provided during a clinical assessment for HAVS at an occupational health clinic. METHODS: One hundred participating workers from the construction industry referred for a HAVS assessment at a hospitalbased ambulatory occupational health clinic in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. A baseline and two-month follow-up questionnaire were completed. RESULTS: Almost all of the participants indicated that they had completed health and safety training within their workplace. However, few received training specific regarding HAVS or AV gloves. Participants' AV glove use improved from 4.3% at baseline to 53.3% at follow-up two months later. Key predictors of participants wearing AV gloves was sharing the educational intervention information with their supervisors and working in a workplace with 20 or more employees. CONCLUSIONS: Training specific to HAVS and AV gloves is lacking in the construction industry. The educational intervention proved most effective in increasing AV glove use when the information was shared within the workplace.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it