Search results

This meta-analysis aims to verify the efficacy of occupational health and safety (OHS) training in terms of knowledge, attitude and beliefs, behavior and health.

The authors included studies published in English (2007–2014) selected from ten databases. Eligibility criteria were studies concerned with the effectiveness of OHS training for primary prevention of workplace injury; and studies focused on examined outcome related to OHS.

The selected studies (n = 28) highlighted a strong support for the effectiveness of training on worker OHS attitudes and beliefs and, to a lesser extent, on worker’s knowledge but only medium for behavior and small evidences for its effectiveness on health.

Future research should more deeply investigate the efficacy on knowledge increase of trainings delivered by experts and researchers, applying different methods, in a small group; training delivered by peer and by researcher, applying different methods; and trained workers less than 29 years and more than 49 years old, considering that workers in these age groups are particularly vulnerable to fatalities.

Our study is a contribution for those they intend to grant effective training, in response to specific needs of OHS. The evidences presented could be considered a first step to identify the factors related to the efficacy of OHS training to plan adequate interventions.

The OHS training is effective on the basis of the extent interventions are carried out for each specific learning outcome.

This meta-analysis suggested that classroom training, although the most used and studied, does not ever revealed itself very effective: it was not significant for outcomes in terms of knowledge and showed a decreasing efficacy for attitudes and beliefs, behaviors and health. It seemed that there was a distinction between interventions on knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, as opposed to behavioral interventions and health.

This article contributes to a better theoretical and empiric understanding of mixed results in the literature investigating the relationship between institutional confidence and adherence to recommended measures during a pandemic.

The article relies on structural equation models (SEMs) based on data from ResPOnsE COVID-19, a rolling cross-section (RCS) survey carried out in Italy from April to June 2020.

The authors’ findings show the existence of multiple pathways of confidence at the national and local level. Confidence in the institutions is positively associated with support for the performance of the Prime Minister and that of the regional institutions in the North West, which in turn, raises the likelihood of following the restrictive measures. However, in the same regions, a good appraisal of the regional system's performance also had a direct positive effect on the perception of being safe from the virus, decreasing adherence to the restrictive measures. Finally, the direct effect of confidence in the institutions on compliance is negative.

The result enlightens the crucial role both of national and local institutions in promoting or inhibiting adherence to restrictive measures during a pandemic and suggests that “one size fits all” measures for increasing overall institutional confidence might not be sufficient to reach the desired goal of achieving compliance in pandemic times.

The authors theorize and test three cognitive mechanisms – (1) the “cascade of confidence”; (2) the “paradox of support” and (3) the “paradox of confidence” – to account for both the positive and negative links between measures of political support and public acceptability of COVID-19 containment measures.