Health and safety-Mod/high-No impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 1 - 7 of 7

Efficacy of the ‘Stand and Move at Work’ multicomponent workplace intervention to reduce sedentary time and improve cardiometabolic risk: A group randomized clinical trial (Periera et al., 2020)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Stand and Move at Work intervention on health outcomes. This study was a randomized controlled trial. Using data collected via…
The effect of business internships model and employment on enhancing the independence of young adults with significant impact from Autism (Schall et al., 2020)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Project SEARCH plus Autism Spectrum Disorder Supports (PS+ASD) on employment and health outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial.…
Testing two subsidized employment models for TANF recipients: Final impacts and costs of the Los Angeles County transitional subsidized employment program (Anderson et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of two approaches to subsidized employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients: Paid Work Experience (PWE) in the…
Testing two subsidized employment models for TANF recipients: Final impacts and costs of the Los Angeles County transitional subsidized employment program (Anderson et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of two approaches to subsidized employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients: Paid Work Experience (PWE) in the…
Occupational radon exposure and lung cancer mortality: Estimating intervention effects using the parametric G formula (Edwards et al 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of three different historical U.S. radon exposure standards on lung cancer mortality. The author used statistical models and data from the Colorado…
An assessment of OSHA’s recent effects on injury rates (McCaffrey 1983)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of OSHA inspections on injury rates in manufacturing and construction firms from 1976 to 1978. Although OSHA no longer operates as it did during this…
Impacts of the Project NetWork Demonstration: Final Report (Kornfield et al. 1999)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
This study’s objective was to report impacts for Project NetWork. Created by the Social Security Administration (SSA), Project NetWork tested specific approaches to improving employment among Social…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.