Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1356544
D. Van Eerd, S. Cardoso, E. Irvin, R. Saunders, Trevor King, S. Macdonald
Abstract Using research evidence in decision-making requires skill, time and resources. Our objective was to examine experiences and perspectives related to research use among occupational safety and health (OSH) knowledge users (KU). This was a qualitative study investigating how research was acquired, assessed, adapted and applied in decision-making. A purposive sample of OSH KU was invited to complete an online survey and/or participate in interviews or focus groups. Most OSH KU indicated using research evidence was important. KU reported having skills and motivation to find and evaluate research. KU also reported sharing evidence with a variety of audiences. Time and resources were consistently noted as barriers. Credibility was an overarching theme as KU wanted to use credible research and noted their own credibility relied on using research in their work. KU were creative in using research in their OSH roles. More research with a broader audience of OSH KU is needed.
{"title":"Occupational safety and health knowledge users’ perspectives about research use","authors":"D. Van Eerd, S. Cardoso, E. Irvin, R. Saunders, Trevor King, S. Macdonald","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1356544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1356544","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Using research evidence in decision-making requires skill, time and resources. Our objective was to examine experiences and perspectives related to research use among occupational safety and health (OSH) knowledge users (KU). This was a qualitative study investigating how research was acquired, assessed, adapted and applied in decision-making. A purposive sample of OSH KU was invited to complete an online survey and/or participate in interviews or focus groups. Most OSH KU indicated using research evidence was important. KU reported having skills and motivation to find and evaluate research. KU also reported sharing evidence with a variety of audiences. Time and resources were consistently noted as barriers. Credibility was an overarching theme as KU wanted to use credible research and noted their own credibility relied on using research in their work. KU were creative in using research in their OSH roles. More research with a broader audience of OSH KU is needed.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1356544","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44382137","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1405575
J. Crawford, J. Cherrie, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, Hilary Cowie, Damien McElvenny
Abstract The aim of this study is to carry out a review of the putative mechanism and health and safety evidence between 2005 and 2015 to inform practice using a systematic review methodology. The International Agency for Research on Cancer highlighted two potentially important mechanisms that may be involved in causing breast cancer following (night) shift work; light at night suppressing melatonin production and epigenetic changes in genes controlling circadian rhythms. Other mechanisms that have been investigated include the effect of chronotype, vitamin D status, psychological stress, fatigue, physiological dysfunction and poor health behaviours including smoking, drinking alcohol, poor diet, the timing of eating food and obesity. Interventions that have been investigated include shift design, pharmacological, chronotype selection, strategic napping and adherence to national cancer screening programmes. Suppression of night time production of melatonin and/or obesity remains the most plausible biological mechanisms for an association between shift work and cancer. Employers should facilitate the overall reduction in cancer risk for shift workers by enabling better health behaviours and facilitate access to national cancer screening programmes.
{"title":"A review of the impact of shift work on occupational cancer: Part 2 – mechanistic and health and safety evidence","authors":"J. Crawford, J. Cherrie, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, Hilary Cowie, Damien McElvenny","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1405575","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1405575","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The aim of this study is to carry out a review of the putative mechanism and health and safety evidence between 2005 and 2015 to inform practice using a systematic review methodology. The International Agency for Research on Cancer highlighted two potentially important mechanisms that may be involved in causing breast cancer following (night) shift work; light at night suppressing melatonin production and epigenetic changes in genes controlling circadian rhythms. Other mechanisms that have been investigated include the effect of chronotype, vitamin D status, psychological stress, fatigue, physiological dysfunction and poor health behaviours including smoking, drinking alcohol, poor diet, the timing of eating food and obesity. Interventions that have been investigated include shift design, pharmacological, chronotype selection, strategic napping and adherence to national cancer screening programmes. Suppression of night time production of melatonin and/or obesity remains the most plausible biological mechanisms for an association between shift work and cancer. Employers should facilitate the overall reduction in cancer risk for shift workers by enabling better health behaviours and facilitate access to national cancer screening programmes.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1405575","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48593292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1404263
D. McElvenny, J. Crawford, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, H. Cowie, J. Cherrie
Abstract There are a growing number of studies suggesting a link between night shift work and increased risk of certain types of cancer, including breast cancer. In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer described shift work involving circadian disruption as probably carcinogenic to humans. A systematic review of the epidemiology on shift work and cancer from 2005 to 2015 was carried out. We used standard systematic review methodology to identify, critically appraise and summarize the relevant epidemiological literature. We looked at reviews and meta-analyses from 2005 to 2015 and recent studies published from 2013 to 2015. For breast cancer, the relative risks of working night shifts have been reducing from 1.5 to around 1.2 over the past decade. A recent meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies has suggested that the overall relative risk of breast cancer may not be raised at all. The evidence for a raised risk of cancers other than breast cancer remains somewhat limited. The epidemiological evidence suggests that if a cancer risk exists from occupational exposure to night shift work, then the relative risk will be no more than around 1.1 or 1.2 and indeed may not exist at all.
越来越多的研究表明，夜班工作与某些类型癌症(包括乳腺癌)的风险增加有关。2007年，国际癌症研究机构(International Agency for Research on Cancer)称，昼夜节律紊乱的倒班工作可能对人类有致癌作用。对2005 - 2015年轮班工作与癌症的流行病学进行系统回顾。我们使用标准的系统综述方法来识别、批判性地评估和总结相关的流行病学文献。我们查看了2005年至2015年的综述和荟萃分析，以及2013年至2015年发表的最新研究。就乳腺癌而言，夜班工作的相对风险在过去十年中已经从1.5降低到1.2左右。最近一项前瞻性队列研究的荟萃分析表明，乳腺癌的总体相对风险可能根本没有提高。乳腺癌以外的癌症风险增加的证据仍然有限。流行病学证据表明，如果夜班工作存在癌症风险，那么相对风险将不超过1.1或1.2左右，甚至可能根本不存在。
{"title":"A review of the impact of shift-work on occupational cancer: part 1 – epidemiological research","authors":"D. McElvenny, J. Crawford, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, H. Cowie, J. Cherrie","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1404263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1404263","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There are a growing number of studies suggesting a link between night shift work and increased risk of certain types of cancer, including breast cancer. In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer described shift work involving circadian disruption as probably carcinogenic to humans. A systematic review of the epidemiology on shift work and cancer from 2005 to 2015 was carried out. We used standard systematic review methodology to identify, critically appraise and summarize the relevant epidemiological literature. We looked at reviews and meta-analyses from 2005 to 2015 and recent studies published from 2013 to 2015. For breast cancer, the relative risks of working night shifts have been reducing from 1.5 to around 1.2 over the past decade. A recent meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies has suggested that the overall relative risk of breast cancer may not be raised at all. The evidence for a raised risk of cancers other than breast cancer remains somewhat limited. The epidemiological evidence suggests that if a cancer risk exists from occupational exposure to night shift work, then the relative risk will be no more than around 1.1 or 1.2 and indeed may not exist at all.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1404263","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43701660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2018.1465263
A. Margaryan, A. Littlejohn, Dane Lukic
Abstract This paper describes the development and evaluation of a toolkit to support organizations in improving their learning from incidents (LFI) activities. Grounded in adult learning theory, extensive literature review and empirical research within the energy sector, the LFI Toolkit has five key components: a Process Model; a Framework; a Questionnaire; a set of Guidelines and a series of Engagement Exercises. The LFI Toolkit fosters participatory learning enabling broader employee engagement, sensemaking and contextualization. The Toolkit was developed and evaluated through participatory co-design methodology including two large energy companies. The data were drawn from four participatory co-design workshops and a stakeholder engagement review meeting including practitioners from a variety of organizations and roles – shop floor workers, frontline and middle managers, senior leaders, health and safety specialists and representatives of professional bodies. The findings provide insight into the clarity, usability and relevance of the Toolkit and the feasibility of its application across other companies.
{"title":"The development and evaluation of a Learning from Incidents toolkit","authors":"A. Margaryan, A. Littlejohn, Dane Lukic","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2018.1465263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2018.1465263","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper describes the development and evaluation of a toolkit to support organizations in improving their learning from incidents (LFI) activities. Grounded in adult learning theory, extensive literature review and empirical research within the energy sector, the LFI Toolkit has five key components: a Process Model; a Framework; a Questionnaire; a set of Guidelines and a series of Engagement Exercises. The LFI Toolkit fosters participatory learning enabling broader employee engagement, sensemaking and contextualization. The Toolkit was developed and evaluated through participatory co-design methodology including two large energy companies. The data were drawn from four participatory co-design workshops and a stakeholder engagement review meeting including practitioners from a variety of organizations and roles – shop floor workers, frontline and middle managers, senior leaders, health and safety specialists and representatives of professional bodies. The findings provide insight into the clarity, usability and relevance of the Toolkit and the feasibility of its application across other companies.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2018.1465263","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42045784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1404737
J. Cherrie, J. Crawford, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, H. Cowie, D. McElvenny
Abstract Shift work that involves disruption to the body’s circadian rhythm is classified as probably carcinogenic to humans based on limited evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals. This article draws together the available information from the epidemiological, mechanistic and health and safety practice research to provide advice for practitioners. There is evidence that the increase in breast cancer risk amongst women who have worked night shifts is relatively modest and we cannot exclude the possibility that there is no cancer risk. If a causal association exists, the most likely mechanism is night time suppression of the production of the hormone melatonin. However, the observed increased risk of breast cancer amongst night shift workers may be due to higher prevalence of obesity and other lifestyle risks in this group of women. Current health and safety policies for shift work generally do not address cancer risks. Employers should develop a workplace policy for night work that informs workers about the potential cancer risks and possible strategies to minimize risks. Employers should also help reduce the cancer risk for shift workers through health promotion initiatives and encouraging access to cancer screening programmes. We summarize the evidence and recommendations in an infographic.
{"title":"A review of the impact of shift-work on cancer: summary of the evidence for practitioners","authors":"J. Cherrie, J. Crawford, Alice Davis, Ken Dixon, Carla Alexander, H. Cowie, D. McElvenny","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1404737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1404737","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Shift work that involves disruption to the body’s circadian rhythm is classified as probably carcinogenic to humans based on limited evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals. This article draws together the available information from the epidemiological, mechanistic and health and safety practice research to provide advice for practitioners. There is evidence that the increase in breast cancer risk amongst women who have worked night shifts is relatively modest and we cannot exclude the possibility that there is no cancer risk. If a causal association exists, the most likely mechanism is night time suppression of the production of the hormone melatonin. However, the observed increased risk of breast cancer amongst night shift workers may be due to higher prevalence of obesity and other lifestyle risks in this group of women. Current health and safety policies for shift work generally do not address cancer risks. Employers should develop a workplace policy for night work that informs workers about the potential cancer risks and possible strategies to minimize risks. Employers should also help reduce the cancer risk for shift workers through health promotion initiatives and encouraging access to cancer screening programmes. We summarize the evidence and recommendations in an infographic.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1404737","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48230662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2018.1477554
Timothy J. Vogus
Organizations across a variety of industries are increasingly facing pressures for highly reliable, nearly error-free performance. Industries from education to health care to manufacturing often lo...
{"title":"Close calls: managing risk and resilience in airline flight safety","authors":"Timothy J. Vogus","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2018.1477554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2018.1477554","url":null,"abstract":"Organizations across a variety of industries are increasingly facing pressures for highly reliable, nearly error-free performance. Industries from education to health care to manufacturing often lo...","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2018.1477554","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48936925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-07-03DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1348571
Christopher Peace
Abstract The consequence/likelihood risk matrix is a widely used risk analysis and reporting technique, often incorporated into risk and safety management software, and often relied on to help make decisions about the tolerability of risk. However, decision makers may not be aware of matrix design features that give rise to uncertainty, or of errors in its use causing further uncertainty. This paper builds on prior evidence to argue that poorly designed or inappropriately used risk matrices result in an increase in uncertainty and, potentially, adverse effects on people and organizational objectives. It is further argued that risk matrices should be designed for reporting as part of an overall risk assessment, and not used on their own. The evidence is reframed as a goal tree to show where design and use of the matrix might reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty in risk assessments. Suggestions are given for reducing uncertainty in the design and use of risk matrices that may enable more effective risk assessments. The article concludes that (1) risk assessors need better training in risk matrix design and use, and (2) decision makers need training to better understand the inherent unreliability of any risk matrix as a decision support technique.
{"title":"The risk matrix: uncertain results?","authors":"Christopher Peace","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1348571","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1348571","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The consequence/likelihood risk matrix is a widely used risk analysis and reporting technique, often incorporated into risk and safety management software, and often relied on to help make decisions about the tolerability of risk. However, decision makers may not be aware of matrix design features that give rise to uncertainty, or of errors in its use causing further uncertainty. This paper builds on prior evidence to argue that poorly designed or inappropriately used risk matrices result in an increase in uncertainty and, potentially, adverse effects on people and organizational objectives. It is further argued that risk matrices should be designed for reporting as part of an overall risk assessment, and not used on their own. The evidence is reframed as a goal tree to show where design and use of the matrix might reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty in risk assessments. Suggestions are given for reducing uncertainty in the design and use of risk matrices that may enable more effective risk assessments. The article concludes that (1) risk assessors need better training in risk matrix design and use, and (2) decision makers need training to better understand the inherent unreliability of any risk matrix as a decision support technique.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1348571","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44788665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-07-03DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1376404
P. Waterson
The number zero often evokes a puzzled reaction amongst people. How, for example, can zero be something and nothing at the same time? The mathematician John Barrow describes how the concept of noth...
零这个数字经常引起人们的困惑。例如，零怎么可能同时是有而无呢？数学家约翰·巴罗描述了无。。。
{"title":"That strange number ‘zero’","authors":"P. Waterson","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1376404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1376404","url":null,"abstract":"The number zero often evokes a puzzled reaction amongst people. How, for example, can zero be something and nothing at the same time? The mathematician John Barrow describes how the concept of noth...","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1376404","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47903844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-07-03DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1374027
S. Dekker
Abstract This paper discusses the literature that shows that declaring a zero vision for everything bad (including unsafe behaviours, incidents, injuries) does not prevent fatalities or major accidents. In fact, parts of the literature show that a reduction in minor badness increases the risk of major accidents and fatalities. This is true in several industries. Two families of explanations are discussed. The first is the concern that declaring a zero vision can reduce operational knowledge. The second is the unsubstantiated assumption that minor injuries and fatalities have the same causal pattern. In general, evidence for or against the utility of a zero vision is dogged by confounding factors (other variables responsible for changes in safety outcomes) and what Giddens called the double hermeneutic, where the results of such studies are only as stable as the attributions the original reporter (e.g. OHS official, case worker) and the subsequent analyst (e.g. researcher) made about a particular event. The paper concludes that in a complex, dynamic, resource-constrained and goal-conflicted world, zero is not an achievable target, but a zero commitment may be worth some encouragement.
{"title":"Zero commitment: commentary on Zwetsloot et al., and Sherratt and Dainty","authors":"S. Dekker","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1374027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1374027","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper discusses the literature that shows that declaring a zero vision for everything bad (including unsafe behaviours, incidents, injuries) does not prevent fatalities or major accidents. In fact, parts of the literature show that a reduction in minor badness increases the risk of major accidents and fatalities. This is true in several industries. Two families of explanations are discussed. The first is the concern that declaring a zero vision can reduce operational knowledge. The second is the unsubstantiated assumption that minor injuries and fatalities have the same causal pattern. In general, evidence for or against the utility of a zero vision is dogged by confounding factors (other variables responsible for changes in safety outcomes) and what Giddens called the double hermeneutic, where the results of such studies are only as stable as the attributions the original reporter (e.g. OHS official, case worker) and the subsequent analyst (e.g. researcher) made about a particular event. The paper concludes that in a complex, dynamic, resource-constrained and goal-conflicted world, zero is not an achievable target, but a zero commitment may be worth some encouragement.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1374027","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43627370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-07-03DOI: 10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110
F. Sherratt, A. Dainty
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Policy and Practice in Health and Safety on 14 August 2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110.
{"title":"Responses to the Vision Zero Articles","authors":"F. Sherratt, A. Dainty","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110","url":null,"abstract":"This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Policy and Practice in Health and Safety on 14 August 2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1361110","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44097489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：