ArticlePloS one2024
Evidence-based dust exposure prediction and/or control tools in occupational settings: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorkplace atmospheric exposure monitoring is the standard method to assess and control hazardous dust exposure; however, feasibility and cost constraints often limit its application. In recent decades, evidence-based tools supporting exposure modelling and control banding have been developed to aid in predicting and/or controlling occupational exposure to various contaminants. However, there is limited information on the availability and applicability of evidence-based tools for predicting and/or controlling occupational dust exposure, as well as on the methods for evaluating these tools across different exposure scenarios. Therefore, this planned scoping review aims to identify existing evidence-based tools for dust exposure predicting and/or controlling and to present evaluation approaches.
methodsWe will employ the scoping review methods developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The search will be conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, in addition to grey literature from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and advanced Google searches. Studies will be included if they report evidence-based tools for predicting and/or controlling dust exposure using quantitative or semi-quantitative designs and provide a detailed explanation of the methods used for tool development. There will be no restrictions on publication date or geographical location; however, only studies published in English will be considered. Studies focusing exclusively on dust exposure in environmental settings will be excluded. Each member of the review team will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts independently and in collaboration, based on the inclusion criteria. The extracted data will encompass details such as author, title, country, accessible platforms, method/tool names, intended users, types of dust, and occupational settings. Descriptions of the identified tools will include numerical data and narrative summaries to ensure a comprehensive overview.
trial registrationOSF (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S6EZJ).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.