ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Artificial intelligence in the workplace: a living systematic review protocol on worker safety, health, and well-being implications.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvancements in artificial intelligence (AI) are transforming employment and working conditions in ways that shape the safety, health, and well-being of workers. We describe a protocol for a living systematic review (LSR) that will examine the interrelationship between AI systems, employment and working conditions, and worker safety, health, and well-being. Research questions are: 1. What types of AI systems are being used within workplaces and how do their design and adoption impact worker safety, health, and well-being? 2. How do a worker's employment and working conditions affect the relationship between the adoption of AI systems and worker safety, health, and well-being? 3. How does a worker's social position (e.g., age, gender, race, disability) shape the interrelationship between AI systems at work, employment and working conditions, and their safety, health, and well-being?
methodsA comprehensive search of primary qualitative and quantitative research will be conducted. MEDLINE, Embase (OVID), PsycINFO (OVID), and Web of Science will be searched every six to twelve months using database-specific terms and keywords. Title/abstract and full-text screening will be completed independently by two reviewers. Relevant articles will be quality appraised using a mixed method assessment tool adapted for studies of AI. Medium and high-quality studies will be synthesized using a best evidence synthesis approach. To ensure relevancy, applied workplace and AI stakeholders will provide feedback at all stages of the LSR process through dissemination excluding quality appraisal. Annually, we will evaluate the appropriateness of the review process (e.g., frequency of searches, requirement to refine research questions, utility of continuing LSR). Any amendments to protocols will be documented. DISCUSSION: This LSR will provide timely and evolving evidence on the implications of AI in the workplace that will be disseminated through a publicly available living review dashboard. We will capture the emerging impact AI has on workers. Findings can be used to develop strategies to minimize AI's potential workplace harms while amplifying its potential benefits, address emerging worker inequities, and inform ongoing discussions regarding responsible and safe AI adoption. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024625501.
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.