The overall quality and scientific value of workplace safety and health research has proven difficult over the past several decades following enactment of the OSH Act in 1970 (Bushnell et al., 2022).
As technological advances and hazard controls for safety issues multiply exponentially, there is an increasing need to formally clarify what constitutes research and differentiate value-added, quality OSH research from the background noise of copious opinion-based articles. The purpose of this article is to discuss the quality and value of what is proclaimed to be OSH research in the context of a formal definition of quality, value-added scientific research.
Defining Value-Added, Quality Scientific Research
Scientific research is defined as “research conducted for the purpose of contributing towards science by the systematic collection, interpretation and evaluation of data and that is performed in a planned manner” (Çaparlar & Dönmez, 2016, p. 212). In many fields, not including engineering and social sciences, the number of citations can be broadly used as a guide for research quality to support or replace academic peer review (Thelwall et al., 2023). Where broad citation count does not have a positive correlation to quality, the quality of research is assessed by whether it adheres to the traditional scientific processes including study design, well-stated hypotheses, defensible investigation methods, data collection, data analysis using trusted statistical methods, and protection against systematic bias and unintended errors (Neiminen et al., 2006). Once a study is determined to be scientific in nature and quality has been established, whether a particular research study adds value can be determined by asking whether the study improves a profession’s capability or body of knowledge (Harvey,2022; Swisher, 2019).
Quality, Value-Added Research & Potential Research Gaps in OSH
In general, assessing the value of scientific research in the OSH field has proven problematic due to the difficulty of demonstrating cause and effect ties between research findings and changes to morbidity, mortality or the efficacy of the hazard controls studied (Downes et al., 2019; Gertler et al., 2011).
Swisher (2019) presents the following questions that must be applied in OSH studies to assess the quality of research and determine whether it contributes to the body of knowledge:
- What is already known about the topic?
- Are we sure why a condition exists and how sure are we that the existing evidence we have is valid and reliable?
- Has a theory been developed that is complete with consistent explanations?
- Do the lines of evidence discussed in the research study support the stated conclusions?
Researchers in the OSH field have historically focused on trying to explain something by giving a cause or reason for it (Cunningham et al., 2020). However, the implications for the utility of research findings and recommendations if implemented in professional practice would prove far more important because this is where lives can be saved and injuries prevented. Recently, OSH researchers have begun to focus on innovation and implementation in this vein (Dugan & Punnett, 2017). With this in mind, future OSH research can focus on challenges associated with implementation and their causal factors, thereby enhancing the body of knowledge with problem-driven solutions that can be readily implemented (Johanes et al., 2023).
As for specific research gaps in OSH, practitioners and researchers can start with the issues and incidents that consistently cause serious injuries and fatalities (SIFs). Within common and uncommon SIF precursors, SIFs have been experienced disproportionally in activities with safety controls and procedures in place, such as chemical handling and hazard communication, confined spaces, fall protection and electrical safety (Lay et al., 2017). Additionally, the innovation and application of new technologies create leverage to prevent SIFs but may also create unintended consequences and conditions that allow new SIF precursors to manifest.
Research studies that focus on safety innovations—such as the use of drones, robots and new methods of work
design—should include a focused look at how their implementation may influence the aim to reduce SIFs and should
be pursued. SIFs generally result from organizational failings that should have been previously identified and addressed(Reason, 1998). In the case of new technology for use in increasing worker safety through the removal of harm, the concept of negative synergy is an important research topic to address. When equipment, design, and human error are combined, greater consequences are likely to result than when each of these factors are addressed in isolation (Ball & Frerkfar, 2015). When implementing new technologies, system complexity and the relationship of equipment, design and human error to other factors that may create or exacerbate potential incidents must be addressed and documented through research to avoid safety system instability that can result in minor incidents or SIFs. This concept is championed by Perrow (1999), who argues that recognition of multiple factor complexity is key to identifying the potential for outlier events.
Current Research
The status of current OSH research can be inferred from the topics and research quality of articles being published
in Professional Safety and other peerreviewed journals that fall under the OSH subject matter umbrella. Topics such as ergonomics, wellness strategies and safety theory tend to dominate academic conversations, while SIF trends stay relatively stagnant. Despite the promotion of safety measures in highly hazardous occupations, approximately 1,000 fatalities occur in the U.S. construction industry each year (Oguz Erkal et al., 2021) and around 5,000 fatalities occur across all industries in the same time frame.
Peer-reviewed research in OSH is increasing through safety-related doctoral programs such as those offered by Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Columbia Southern University and Capitol Technology University. Such programs allow practitioners to be guided by trained researchers in a fully remote or hybrid academic environment. The
stated vision of the Construction Safety Research Alliance (CSRA, n.d.a) is “to eliminate serious injuries and fatalities
in the construction industry through transformative research and defendable science.” This organization invites industry safety professionals and academic experts to share guidance topics of greatest concern based on SIF occurrences and contributing factors, and conducts scientific research focused on preventing SIFs (CSRA, n.d.b). Similar collaborative efforts can provide a strong focus for peer-reviewed research to advance in the areas of greatest concern and impact on SIF trends across industries.
Conclusion
A Google Scholar search of peerreviewed literature from the past several decades on OSH subjects aimed at identifying, quantifying and providing proposed controls to prevent incidents with nonserious injuries suggests that great progress has been made. Workplaces have become safer according to documented statistics relative to significant workplace injury reductions over time. However, the SIF trend has not declined at the same rate. As technological solutions are put forth almost daily, the business of highly hazardous work continues to become more complex such that research must focus on those areas that aim to bend the SIF trend in a downward direction.
Despite formal peer-reviewed research being contributed by academicians, practitioners and research students to
OSH-related publications, helping to bridge the gap between research and practice, a large number of opinion-based
articles continue to fill the “know-do” gap. It is important that safety researchers seeking to contribute to the body of
knowledge in a meaningful way study, apply and adhere to the rigorous requirements of quality, value-added and
statistically reliable scientific research in their efforts. The future of workers in high-hazard jobs depends on it.
Future OSH research can focus on challenges associated with implementation and their causal factors.
