...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Safety science >Realistic evaluation as a new way to design and evaluate occupational safety interventions
【24h】

Realistic evaluation as a new way to design and evaluate occupational safety interventions

机译：现实评估是设计和评估职业安全干预措施的新方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Recent debates regarding the criteria for evaluating occupational health and safety interventions have focused on the need for incorporating qualitative elements and process evaluation, in addition to attempting to live up to the Cochrane criteria. Reflecting fundamental epistemological conflicts and shortcomings of the Cochrane criteria in evaluating intervention studies, the debate challenges the traditional (quasi-) experimental design and methodology, which are often used within safety research. This article discusses a revised 'realistic evaluation' approach as a way to meet these challenges. Evidence from the literature as well as examples from an integrated (leader-based/worker-based) safety intervention study (2008-2010) in a large wood manufacturing company are presented, with focus on the pros and cons of using randomised-controlled-trials and a revised realistic evaluation model. A revised realistic evaluation model is provided which includes factors such as role behaviour, leader and worker motivation, underreporting of accidents/injuries, production pressure, unplanned organisational change and accounting for multilayer effects. These can be attained through qualitative and/or quantitative methods, allowing for the use of realistic evaluation in both large and small scale studies, as well as in systematic reviews. The revised realistic evaluation model offers a promising new way of designing and evaluating occupational safety research. This model can help safety science move forward in setting qualitative and/or quantitative criteria regarding context, mechanisms and processes for single studies and for reviews. Focus is not limited to whether the expected results appear or not, but include suggestions for what works for whom, under what circumstances, in what respects and how.
机译：关于评估职业健康和安全干预措施标准的最新辩论集中于除了尝试符合Cochrane标准之外，还需要纳入定性要素和过程评估。辩论反映了评估干预研究时Cochrane标准在认识论上的基本矛盾和不足，该辩论对安全研究中经常使用的传统（准）实验设计和方法提出了挑战。本文讨论了一种经过修订的“现实评估”方法，以应对这些挑战。本文提供了来自文献的证据，以及来自一家大型木材制造公司的综合（基于领导者/基于工人）安全干预研究（2008-2010年）的示例，重点介绍了使用随机对照控制方法的利弊试验和修订的现实评估模型。提供了经过修订的现实评估模型，其中包括诸如角色行为，领导者和工人的动机，事故/伤害报告不足，生产压力，计划外组织变更以及对多层效应的考虑等因素。这些可以通过定性和/或定量方法来实现，从而可以在大型和小型研究以及系统评价中使用现实的评估。修订后的现实评估模型为设计和评估职业安全研究提供了一种有希望的新方法。该模型可以帮助安全科学在设置有关单个研究和评价的背景，机制和过程的定性和/或定量标准方面向前发展。重点不仅限于预期结果是否出现，还包括针对什么对谁有效，在什么情况下，在什么方面以及如何进行的建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号