Barriers for implementation of successful change to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and how to systematically address them
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
This scoping review identified common barriers and facilitators encountered during the implementation of changes to prevent musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) and examined their relationship with those encountered in general Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) efforts. Thematic analysis of the literature identified 11 barriers: (i) Lack of time; (ii) Lack of resources; (iii) Lack of communication; (iv) Lack of management support, commitment, and participation; (v) Lack of knowledge and training; (vi) Resistance to change; (vii) Changing work environment; (viii) Scope of activities; (ix) Lack of trust, fear of job loss, or loss of authority; (x) Process deficiencies; and (xi) Difficulty of implementing controls. Three facilitators identified were: (i) Training, knowledge and ergonomists' support; (ii) Communication, participation and support; and (iii) An effective implementation process. The barriers and facilitators identified were similar to those in general OHS processes. The integration of MSD prevention into a general management system approach may overcome these barriers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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