WorkHealth Promotion

Employees’safety is a primary consideration when designing structures andworkflow in any organization. Different scholars apply variedapproaches to emphasize the need for a comprehensive health promotionin workplaces. Chapman conducted a Meta-evaluation to determine theeconomic returns of occupational safety promotion. The article,dubbed Meta-Evaluationof Worksite Health Promotion Economic Return Studies: 2012 Update,analyzes the results of different studies derived from variousinternationally acknowledged journals to draw an informed conclusion.

TheType of Research

Chapman’sresearch is basic. He inclines to the secondary data analysis thatinvolves using the works of other authors with an interest in thesame topic to make a sound inference. Unlike an experimental researchthat describes, explains, predicts, and controls given processes, thestudy lacks a hypothetical statement, as the author does not intendto test any inference. The rationale for this is that theexperimental studies conducted in varied settings incorporated in theliterature review examined specific assumptions. Chapman combines thefindings and makes a conclusion on the economic returns of workplacesafety promotion (Chapman, 2012).

TheStudy Population

Asa secondary research, the author did not conduct a primaryrecruitment of participants to respond to pre-set questions.Nonetheless, the article outlines inclusion criteria for the articlesused in his study. First, the study has involved the examination ofat least three proposed safety programs (Chapman, 2012). Theseincluded smoking prevention and cessation, physical fitness,nutrition, hypertension control, prevention of back injury, weightmanagement, and prevention of cardiovascular conditions, as well asreduction of cholesterol (Chapman, 2012).

TheMethodology

Theresearch followed a non-experimental approach. As a secondary study,the researcher did not have the opportunity to control or manipulatethe variables and the subjects. A secondary research relies onobservations and interactions of the information from differentsources to arrive at a given conclusion. Also, the inquiry is limitedto the available resources. In the research, Chapman drew informationfrom 62 sources. The only authority that the author had regarding theoutcomes of the study was the choice of the articles.

Themethodology also involved a systematic review of the selectedarticles using a collection of a standardized set of seven criteria.In the strategy, a specified number of points from the criteriondetermined the relevance of the article to the study. Those with morepoints were considered being more consistent and significant to theinquiry (Chapman, 2012).

TheType of Data

Thedata depicted in the study is qualitative. The initial inquiriescollected data through a systematic sampling process. The informationwas subjected to various tools of analysis that were validated by thedifferent regulating and ethical authorities (Chapman, 2012).Handling and decoding information from multiple sources would bechallenging for Chapman since it would involve analysis and makeinferences. However, findings and conclusions made by differentauthors made it possible to make a comparison. The Meta-evaluationthat Chapman applies saves on time when putting together acomprehensive research. Also, the articles have been published inpeer-reviewed journals (Chapman, 2012). The author does not have tosubject them to another procedure to determine their validity. Thededuction is also valid since it is compiled from the conclusionsarrived at by authors with authority in the field of healthpromotion.

Relevanceof the Research to the Topic

Chapman’sarticle inclines to the primary objective of outlined in the inquiry.The author sought to identify the economic benefits of maintaining ahealthy work environment (Chapman, 2012). It integrates the ideas ofresearchers who tackle the topic from various perspectives. Also, hisfindings are consistent with the purpose of the study. Chapmanagrees with the other researchers that working in a safe environmentprevent injuries and consequently the cost of health (Chapman, 2012).

Generalizationof the Results

Forthe findings of research to be generalized, the author must haveauthority in the field of study and make valid conclusions. Thesample is also imperative since it must be an accurate representationof the population under study. The findings in the article can beapplied in any workplace setting for several reasons. First, theauthor follows a meta-evaluation (Chapman, 2012). The method has beenused in a range of reports adopted by different bodies. Also, thesample size is big enough to allow the generalization of thefindings. The 62 articles analyzed by Chapman consist of studiesconducted in different workplaces (Chapman, 2012). The heterogeneousnature of the establishments and the general deductions made renderthe study applicable in assorted workplaces.

Consistencyof the Data

Asnoted, the article involves a secondary study that does not consistof any basic data. All the 62 studies have been published inpeer-reviewed journal. In addition, the 62 works have a relativelysimilar conclusion. The writers agree that any establishment reapsvarious economic benefits by maintaining safe workstations (Chapman,2012). Chapman does not indicate any inconsistency in the collecteddata. The reliability observed in the data and findings was largelyinfluenced by the inclusion criteria of the sample.

of the Author’s Work

Chapmansought to evaluate the worksite health promotion economic returns.Safe environments reduce the expenditure on injuries and othercompensations. While some organizations concentrate on preventingimmediate physical injuries, others focus on the comprehensiveapproach to health promotion (Chapman, 2012). The employers givelifestyle conditions less attention. They include obesity, high bloodpressure, and heart-related conditions. A total of 62 articles drawnfrom peer-reviewed journals were included in the study. According tothe author, a meta-evaluation has been instrumental in providinginformation for credible reports (Chapman, 2012). The relevantjournals that sufficed the research included American Journal ofHealth Promotion, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, AmericanJournal of Public Health, Journal of American Medical Association andJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (Chapman, 2012).

Thearticle indicates that companies use diverse methods of measuring theeconomic benefits of implementing safe working conditions. However,despite the methodological inconsistencies, the articles showedregularity in the magnitude of the changes implemented in theworkplaces.

KeyFindings

Themeta-evaluation revealed that there lacks a standard way ofdetermining the economic returns of workplace health promotionprograms (Chapman, 2012). The inconsistency is marked by the use ofdifferent measurement methods, varying categories of the economicvariables, and application of diverse research designs andstatistical tests. Nonetheless, there is observed congruence in thefinancial benefits reaped from such programs. In addition, diversecontrol bodies enforce some basic safety requirement in workplaces.Some entrepreneurs set standards for internal best practices. Thebenefits accrued from such environments always surpass the initialcost incurred. The author concludes that the outcomes of workplacesafety have various profound outcomes that all the employers shouldbe embrace. It is an effective approach to reducing the cost ofmedical procedures and absenteeism of workers.

Howthe Study Relates to HE 488

HE488 (Health Promotion in the Workplace) encompasses planning andimplementation of safety guidelines in stress management, weightcontrol, smoking cessation, substance addiction, and themethodologies for evaluation in a health promotion setting. The metaevaluation`s purpose was to determine monetary gains derived fromestablishing a healthy work environment (Chapman, 2012). HE 488outlines the benefits that managers can observe by complying with therecommended comprehensive workplace health measures. While the courseis wide in content, the article addresses one of the manyimplications of an employee-friendly enterprise.

Also,the course has a comprehensive approach to achieving a model healthstrategy by addressing both physical injuries and habitualconditions. As noted, a significant number of employees are candidabout physical injuries at the expense of other lifestyle andbehavioral ailments that affect the productivity of the workforce.The article uses a similar approach by incorporating findings frommultiple sources. The 62 primary articles used in the study havedifferent topics and variables. Nonetheless, they all convergetowards the financial returns of a healthy staff.

Finally,the course acknowledges the emergence of new practices that are moreefficient than the conventional ones. Through the course, studentsare acquainted with the emerging trends. Chapman inclines to thisrequirement by using current articles that address the new healthissues and strategies in the workplaces. He also applies ameta-evaluation that has been validated by different bodies. Studentstaking HE 488 may find the article informative and consistent withthe course requirements.

References

Chapman,L. S. (2012). Meta-evaluation of worksite health promotion economicreturn studies: 2012 update. AmericanJournal of Health Promotion,26(4), TAHP-1.