MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Status of ISO 45001;2018 Implementation in Seaports; A Case Study

2022· article· en· W4385872874 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Isaac Animah, Mahmood Shafiee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsCertificationBusinessEnforcementOccupational safety and healthOperations managementManagement systemTransport engineeringMarketingEngineeringManagementMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seaports are global players in the maritime industry with the responsibility of promoting the well-being of employees and customers in the workplace.However, over the past years safety performance of seaports operating within the West African sub-region has become a major concern due to the lack of enforcement of national occupational health and safety regulations.This has compelled some seaports to adopt the occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS) ISO 45001:2018 standard.The aim of this study is therefore to assess the progress seaports have made in the implementation of ISO 45001:2018 standard and discuss the challenges that need to be overcome when implementing ISO 45001:2018 standard in seaports.Through the use of questionnaire, observations and review of institutional document, data was gathered from workers and senior managers of export, container depot and the stevedoring sections of seaports operating in Ghana.The findings of this study revealed that seaports within Ghana have made some progress with regards to workers' awareness of occupational health and safety issues, usage of personal protective equipment (PPEs) and safe working procedures.However, it was also established that a lot more needs to be done to improve the current levels of communication, safety training and resources in relation to health and safety management.The findings of this research are useful to maritime institutions wishing to migrate from OHSAS 18001:2007 certification to ISO 45001:2018 certification or seeking to improve on already existing system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.606
Teacher spread0.414 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOccupational Health and Safety Research→French-language works237,207→