MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043189942 · doi:10.13075/mp.5893.00972

Obstacles to the development of workplace health promotion in Poland – the perspective of companies’ representatives

2020· article· en· W3043189942 on OpenAlexaff
Krzysztof Puchalski, Elżbieta Korzeniowska

Bibliographic record

VenueMedycyna Pracy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsWorkplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Promotion (chess)BusinessHealth promotionPublic relationsEnvironmental healthMedicineNursingPublic healthPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of the paper is to present the barriers and difficulties faced by companies in Poland in their employee health promotion activities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The aforementioned obstacles were analyzed in terms of their quantity and quality. Quantitative data come from 5 nationwide surveys conducted in 2000 (N = 755), 2006 (N = 611), 2010 (N = 1002), 2015 (N = 1000) and 2017 (N = 1000), in companies employing ≥50 people. Qualitative data were collected from representatives of such companies by means of an audience survey conducted during a conference (N = 75), 8 focus group interviews (N = 64) and individual in-depth interviews (N = 14). RESULTS: Invariably, the most frequently reported difficulty has been the shortage of financial resources for health promotion, as well as the lack of real support (legal, fiscal) from the government. By 2017, the former was indicated by 53% of companies, and the latter by 48%. A detailed analysis has shown that they are interrelated, and the key barrier is the mentality of employers and managers, i.e., their reluctance to health promotion, the fact that they are convinced of its high costs, a poor knowledge about its importance and implementation methods, and fear of the unknown. Other difficulties include: culture and work organization not fostering health care, a poor preparation and limited opportunities for the staff to implement health promotion, employees' reluctance to employer's health-related activities, some drawbacks of offers addressed to companies by external service providers, and, to a lesser extent, other difficulties arising from the business environment. CONCLUSIONS: To effectively mitigate these barriers, it is necessary to involve the government in the implementation of a coherent strategy to support health promotion in companies. Its main directions would be: shaping employers' awareness, supporting health-related activities through fiscal mechanisms (tax and insurance), educating the managerial staff, and pursuing effective cooperation with external providers of health services for employees. Med Pr. 2020;71(5):569-86.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedycyna PracySame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207