Insights into Women’s Occupational Health and Safety: A Decade in Review of Primary Data Studies
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
Women play integral roles across various sectors, including mining. Moreover, they often form a majority in certain sectors, such as healthcare and education. Biological (sex) and social (gender) differences can influence how hazards are assessed and controlled for women at work. Therefore, because of the importance of women’s occupational health and safety (OHS), this study reviews and analyzes OHS-related research studies to explore (i) the attention given to women’s OHS; (ii) the specific occupations studied; and (iii) the primary OHS issues and challenges faced by women. Following PRISMA guidelines, the study examined articles from 2010–2021, selecting 62 that utilized primary data, with all or part of their participants being female. The results indicate that the included studies examined women’s OHS in specific occupations. These include healthcare workers, farm and forestry workers, office staff, teachers, firefighters, police officers, nail technicians, workers in the clothing industry, and general industrial workers. The trend of publishing articles on women’s OHS has been growing, with most studies focusing on healthcare and agriculture. The USA and South Korea are leading in publications in the field of women’s OHS, while the USA, Australia, and the Netherlands have the highest collaboration rates. Key findings reveal that the most common OHS issues faced by women in various occupations include stress, fatigue, musculoskeletal disorders and pain, sleep disorders, long working hours, depression and anxiety, workplace violence, and allergies and skin problems. Many of these issues are related to mental health. Specific issues based on the nature of the work vary; for example, teachers experience voice disorders, while farmers face digestive problems. This study contributes theoretically by enhancing understanding of women’s OHS, serving as a foundation for further research, and providing practical guidance for employers and policymakers seeking to implement effective strategies for guaranteeing women’s OHS across sectors.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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