↓ Skip to main content

Practice status of specialized agencies for occupational health management of small- to medium-size enterprises and the factors improving their performance: a cross-sectional survey study

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Practice status of specialized agencies for occupational health management of small- to medium-size enterprises and the factors improving their performance: a cross-sectional survey study
Published in
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40557-017-0161-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saerom Lee, Jun-Pyo Myong, Eun-A Kim, Huisu Eom, Bowha Choi, Young Joong Kang

Abstract

We examined the current status of specialized agencies for occupational health management (SAs) and their workforce. Furthermore, we aimed to clarify the current practice status of SA healthcare professionals and factors that influence their performance. To examine the current SA workforce, we analyzed data from the 2014 Survey of Current Status of SA and their Workforce from the Ministry of Employment and Labor (MOEL). Furthermore, we mailed out an original questionnaire to SA professionals to determine their current health management status and factors that affect their performance. Data from the respondents (N = 384) were analyzed. In 2014, the workforce performing health management in SAs comprised 232 physicians, 507 nurses, and 312 occupational hygienists, with no significant regional differences in the distribution of physicians and nurses. According to the findings of the questionnaire, the average daily number of worker consultations by physicians and nurses was 22.8, while the average time taken for health management ranged from 74.3 to 104.3 min, depending on the size of the firm. Most of the respondents (41.5%) answered that they were following-up on more than 80% of individuals with illnesses. Among health management tasks, performance scores of "consultations for general diseases" and "consultations for lifestyle habits" were relatively high, whereas health promotion activities at workplaces were relatively low. There was a significant correlation between the utilization of general and special health examination results and task performance. Among health management tasks, follow-up management of individuals with illnesses and consultations for disease/lifestyle habits were relatively well performed, whereas health promotion activities at workplaces were not performed well. Among factors that positively influenced SA performance at workplaces, only the utilization of health examination results had significant effects. Therefore, to accomplish health management goals and perform effective health management at workplaces, there is a need to establish a comprehensive system of occupational health service outsourcing integrating health examinations and health management services. Furthermore, the current task system, which focuses on follow-up management, should be expanded to incorporate preventive and health promotion functions-the fundamental functions of occupational health services (OHS).

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 25%
Student > Master 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 3 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,448,169
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#99
of 175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,269
of 312,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.