使用人工智能的职业健康和安全工具对工人的伤害或疾病有可衡量的影响吗?系统评价的结果。

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Arif Jetha, Hela Bakhtari, Emma Irvin, Aviroop Biswas, Maxwell J Smith, Cameron Mustard, Victoria H Arrandale, Jack T Dennerlein, Peter M Smith
{"title":"使用人工智能的职业健康和安全工具对工人的伤害或疾病有可衡量的影响吗?系统评价的结果。","authors":"Arif Jetha, Hela Bakhtari, Emma Irvin, Aviroop Biswas, Maxwell J Smith, Cameron Mustard, Victoria H Arrandale, Jack T Dennerlein, Peter M Smith","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02869-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise as a tool that can be used by practitioners in the field of occupational health and safety (OHS). This study aimed to identify AI applications specifically used for OHS and examine their impact on worker morbidity or mortality outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive systematic review. We searched six databases to identify published quantitative studies of OHS AI applications across the hierarchy of controls that were published between years 2018 to 2024. Title/abstract and full-text screening was conducted to identify eligible studies which were then assessed for quality and risk of bias and synthesized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1255 articles identified by our search, only two met eligibility criteria; one of which was appraised as medium quality and the other as low quality. The one medium quality study identified by our review was an AI-based chatbot health promotion tool which was shown to improve musculoskeletal symptoms. Our systematic review shows that we are at the early stages of understanding the role AI can play in OHS and it may be premature to recommend the wide-spread use of AI for health and safety practice within workplaces.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a critical need for future research to unpack how considerations taken in the development and adoption of workplace AI tools for OHS can determine their effectiveness in addressing worker injury or illness.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023414422.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"146"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12247322/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do occupational health and safety tools that utilize artificial intelligence have a measurable impact on worker injury or illness? Findings from a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Arif Jetha, Hela Bakhtari, Emma Irvin, Aviroop Biswas, Maxwell J Smith, Cameron Mustard, Victoria H Arrandale, Jack T Dennerlein, Peter M Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-025-02869-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise as a tool that can be used by practitioners in the field of occupational health and safety (OHS). This study aimed to identify AI applications specifically used for OHS and examine their impact on worker morbidity or mortality outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive systematic review. We searched six databases to identify published quantitative studies of OHS AI applications across the hierarchy of controls that were published between years 2018 to 2024. Title/abstract and full-text screening was conducted to identify eligible studies which were then assessed for quality and risk of bias and synthesized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1255 articles identified by our search, only two met eligibility criteria; one of which was appraised as medium quality and the other as low quality. The one medium quality study identified by our review was an AI-based chatbot health promotion tool which was shown to improve musculoskeletal symptoms. Our systematic review shows that we are at the early stages of understanding the role AI can play in OHS and it may be premature to recommend the wide-spread use of AI for health and safety practice within workplaces.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a critical need for future research to unpack how considerations taken in the development and adoption of workplace AI tools for OHS can determine their effectiveness in addressing worker injury or illness.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023414422.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12247322/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02869-1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02869-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)有望成为职业健康与安全(OHS)领域从业人员可以使用的工具。本研究旨在确定专门用于职业健康安全的人工智能应用程序,并检查它们对工人发病率或死亡率结果的影响。方法:我们进行了全面的系统评价。我们检索了六个数据库,以确定2018年至2024年间发表的跨控制层次的OHS人工智能应用的已发表定量研究。对标题/摘要和全文进行筛选,以确定符合条件的研究,然后对这些研究的质量和偏倚风险进行评估并进行综合。结果:在我们检索到的1255篇文章中,只有两篇符合资格标准;其中一个被评为中等质量,另一个被评为低质量。我们的综述确定的一项中等质量的研究是基于人工智能的聊天机器人健康促进工具,该工具被证明可以改善肌肉骨骼症状。我们的系统回顾表明,我们还处于了解人工智能在职业健康安全方面的作用的早期阶段,建议在工作场所广泛使用人工智能进行健康和安全实践可能还为时过早。结论:未来的研究迫切需要揭示在开发和采用工作场所人工智能职业健康安全工具时所考虑的因素如何确定其在解决工伤或疾病方面的有效性。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD42023414422。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do occupational health and safety tools that utilize artificial intelligence have a measurable impact on worker injury or illness? Findings from a systematic review.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise as a tool that can be used by practitioners in the field of occupational health and safety (OHS). This study aimed to identify AI applications specifically used for OHS and examine their impact on worker morbidity or mortality outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review. We searched six databases to identify published quantitative studies of OHS AI applications across the hierarchy of controls that were published between years 2018 to 2024. Title/abstract and full-text screening was conducted to identify eligible studies which were then assessed for quality and risk of bias and synthesized.

Results: Of the 1255 articles identified by our search, only two met eligibility criteria; one of which was appraised as medium quality and the other as low quality. The one medium quality study identified by our review was an AI-based chatbot health promotion tool which was shown to improve musculoskeletal symptoms. Our systematic review shows that we are at the early stages of understanding the role AI can play in OHS and it may be premature to recommend the wide-spread use of AI for health and safety practice within workplaces.

Conclusion: There is a critical need for future research to unpack how considerations taken in the development and adoption of workplace AI tools for OHS can determine their effectiveness in addressing worker injury or illness.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023414422.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信