International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
928 | P a g e
Leveraging AI and Machine Learning to Predict Occupational Diseases: A Conceptual
Framework for Proactive Health Risk Management in High-Risk Industries
Cynthia Obianuju Ozobu 1, Friday Emmanuel Adikwu 2, Oladipo Odujobi 3, Fidelis Othuke Onyekwe 4, Emmanuella
Onyinye Nwulu 5, Andrew Ifesinachi Daraojimba 6*
1 Independent Researcher, Lagos, Nigeria
2 Waltersmith Refining and Petrochemical Company Ltd, Lagos, Nigeria
3 Tomba Resources, Warri, Nigeria
4 Shell Petroleum and Development Company (SPDC), Port Harcourt Nigeria
5 SNEPCo (Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company) Lagos. Nigeria
6 Signal Alliance Technology Holding, Nigeria
* Corresponding Author: Andrew Ifesinachi Daraojimba
Article Info
ISSN (online): 2582-7138
Volume: 04
Issue: 01
January-February 2023
Received: 07-01-2023
Accepted: 01-02-2023
Page No: 928-938
Abstract
Occupational diseases remain a significant challenge in high-risk industries, where hazardous
working conditions expose employees to health risks that often go undetected until symptoms become
severe. To address this, leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) offers
transformative potential for proactive health risk management by enabling predictive modeling, real-
time monitoring, and data-driven decision-making. This study presents a conceptual framework for
integrating AI and ML technologies to predict and mitigate occupational diseases in high-risk
industries such as mining, construction, and manufacturing. The proposed framework encompasses
three key components: data acquisition, predictive modeling, and intervention strategies. Data
acquisition involves collecting real-time health and environmental data through wearable sensors,
IoT-enabled devices, and workplace monitoring systems. Predictive modeling employs advanced ML
algorithms, such as decision trees, neural networks, and support vector machines, to identify patterns
and risk factors associated with occupational diseases. Intervention strategies leverage predictive
insights to develop targeted prevention measures, such as redesigning work environments, optimizing
workflows, and implementing personalized health interventions. A case study approach evaluates the
framework’s applicability, focusing on high-risk industries in Nigeria. Initial results demonstrate the
feasibility of using AI-driven systems to identify early indicators of diseases such as respiratory
disorders, musculoskeletal conditions, and noise-induced hearing loss. The findings also highlight the
framework's potential to enhance workplace safety, reduce healthcare costs, and improve employee
well-being by transitioning from reactive to proactive health management. The framework
underscores the importance of cross-disciplinary collaboration among engineers, healthcare
professionals, and policymakers to ensure effective implementation. Ethical considerations, such as
data privacy and fairness, are also addressed to ensure equitable access and compliance with
international health and safety standards. This conceptual framework lays the foundation for future
research and policy development aimed at integrating AI and ML technologies into occupational
health systems, particularly in resource-constrained settings, to foster safer and healthier work
environments.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54660/.IJMRGE.2023.4.1.928-938
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Occupational Diseases, Predictive Modeling, Health Risk Management,
High-Risk Industries, Workplace Safety, Wearable Technology
1. Introduction
Occupational diseases pose a significant challenge in high-risk industries, where workers are frequently exposed to hazardous
conditions that can lead to long-term health issues. Industries such as mining, construction, manufacturing, and petrochemicals
are particularly vulnerable due to the nature of their operations, which often involve exposure to harmful substances, repetitive
physical tasks, and extreme environmental conditions. Common occupational diseases in these settings include respiratory
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
929 | P a g e
disorders, musculoskeletal injuries, noise-induced hearing
loss, and stress-related illnesses (Azizi, et al, 2022, Elumalai,
Brindha & Lakshmanan, 2017, Nunfam, et al, 2019). These
diseases not only impact workers' health and quality of life
but also result in substantial economic losses for
organizations through absenteeism, reduced productivity,
and increased healthcare costs.
Traditional approaches to occupational health management in
these industries have predominantly been reactive, focusing
on addressing health issues after they arise. While these
approaches provide short-term relief, they fail to tackle the
root causes of occupational diseases and often lead to
repeated cycles of risk and illness. The lack of real-time
monitoring and predictive capabilities limits the ability to
anticipate health risks and implement timely preventive
measures. This gap underscores the need for innovative
solutions that can shift the paradigm from reactive to
proactive health risk management (Abbasi, 2018, Fargnoli &
Lombardi, 2019, Lee, Cameron & Hassall, 2019).
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) offer
transformative potential in addressing this challenge. These
technologies can process vast amounts of data from wearable
devices, IoT sensors, and workplace monitoring systems to
identify patterns, predict potential health risks, and
recommend preventive interventions. By enabling early
detection of occupational hazards and providing data-driven
insights, AI and ML facilitate a proactive approach to health
risk management. Furthermore, these technologies can adapt
to dynamic workplace conditions, offering real-time
solutions tailored to specific environments and individual
workers (Shi, et al, 2022, Tranter, 2020, Wollin, et al, 2020).
This study aims to develop a conceptual framework for
leveraging AI and ML to predict and mitigate occupational
diseases in high-risk industries. The framework focuses on
integrating data acquisition, predictive modeling, and
intervention strategies to create a comprehensive system for
health risk management. Its significance lies in its potential
to enhance workplace safety, reduce healthcare costs, and
improve worker well-being, contributing to sustainable
industrial growth. By addressing the limitations of traditional
approaches and harnessing the power of modern
technologies, this study seeks to provide a roadmap for the
future of occupational health management in high-risk
industries (Ashri, 2019, Dong, et al, 2015, Keating, 2017).
2. Background and literature review
Occupational diseases remain a critical concern in high-risk
industries, where workers are regularly exposed to hazardous
conditions that jeopardize their health. Common diseases in
these sectors include respiratory disorders, musculoskeletal
conditions, noise-induced hearing loss, and stress-related
illnesses. Respiratory disorders often result from prolonged
exposure to dust, chemicals, or toxic fumes in industries like
mining and petrochemicals, leading to chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (COPD) and silicosis (Bevilacqua &
Ciarapica, 2018, Fontes, et al, 2022, Olu, 2017).
Musculoskeletal conditions, including repetitive strain
injuries and lower back pain, are prevalent in construction
and manufacturing, where tasks often involve repetitive
motions, heavy lifting, and poor ergonomic practices. Noise-
induced hearing loss is another widespread issue in industries
with high-decibel machinery, such as manufacturing and
construction. Additionally, stress-related illnesses, including
cardiovascular conditions and mental health disorders,
emerge from high-pressure work environments with
inadequate support systems (Avwioroko, 2023, Cosner,
2023, Kasperson, et al, 2019).
Despite the significant impact of these diseases, traditional
health management systems in high-risk industries remain
predominantly reactive. These systems focus on treating
illnesses after they manifest, often neglecting the underlying
causes and preventive strategies. Health surveillance is
typically limited to periodic medical examinations, which fail
to provide real-time insights into emerging risks. Ergonomic
interventions, while helpful, are not consistently integrated
with health monitoring practices, leaving gaps in
comprehensive risk management. Moreover, resource
constraints and a lack of technological adoption exacerbate
these limitations, particularly in developing economies,
where workplace safety standards are often underdeveloped
(Abdul Hamid, 2022, Gwenzi & Chaukura, 2018, Lewis, et
al, 2016). Figure 1 shows chart of Causes of occupational
diseases presented by Oranusi, Dahunsi & Idowu, 2014.
Fig 1: Causes of occupational diseases (Oranusi, Dahunsi & Idowu, 2014)
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
930 | P a g e
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have
emerged as transformative tools in addressing these
challenges. AI and ML technologies can process large
volumes of data from various sources, including wearable
devices, IoT sensors, and workplace monitoring systems. By
identifying patterns and correlations in this data, these
technologies enable predictive modeling of health risks and
proactive interventions. For instance, wearable devices
equipped with AI algorithms can monitor physiological
parameters such as heart rate, fatigue, and respiratory rate in
real-time, providing early warnings of potential health issues
(Redinger, 2019, Ruhrer, 2016, Shad, et al, 2019, Xiong, et
al, 2018). Similarly, IoT sensors can track environmental
factors like air quality, noise levels, and temperature,
allowing for timely adjustments to mitigate risks.
Several case studies highlight the potential of AI and ML in
improving workplace safety. In mining, for example, AI-
driven systems have been used to monitor exposure to
harmful particulates, enabling real-time adjustments in
ventilation and protective equipment. In manufacturing,
predictive analytics have been applied to identify ergonomic
risks, leading to the redesign of workstations to reduce strain
and prevent injuries. These applications demonstrate the
effectiveness of AI and ML in transitioning from reactive to
proactive health management, reducing the prevalence of
occupational diseases, and enhancing worker well-being
(Benson, 2021, Friis, 2015, Jung, Woo & Kang, 2020,
Loeppke, et al, 2015).
However, the widespread adoption of AI and ML in
occupational health management is not without challenges.
One significant gap is the limited integration of these
technologies into existing health systems. Many
organizations lack the infrastructure, expertise, and resources
to implement AI-driven solutions effectively. Additionally,
traditional approaches to occupational health often rely on
manual processes and are resistant to change, creating
barriers to technological adoption (Adams, 2023, Ganiyu,
2018, Kamunda, Mathuthu & Madhuku, 2016). These gaps
highlight the need for frameworks that facilitate the seamless
integration of AI and ML into health risk management
systems. The Integration of AI in smart healthcare presented
by Herath & Mittal, 2022, is shown in figure 2.
Fig 2: Integration of AI in smart healthcare (Herath & Mittal, 2022).
Ethical and technical considerations also play a crucial role
in the implementation of AI and ML in occupational health.
Data privacy is a major concern, as wearable devices and
sensors collect sensitive personal information that must be
protected from misuse. Ensuring fairness in AI algorithms is
another challenge, as biases in data collection or model
training can lead to unequal treatment of workers based on
factors such as age, gender, or job role. Implementation
challenges, including the cost of deploying advanced
technologies and the need for skilled personnel to manage
them, further complicate the adoption process (Adefemi, et
al, 2023, Guzman, et al, 2022, Lohse & Zhivov, 2019).
Addressing these issues requires robust regulatory
frameworks, transparent data governance policies, and
ongoing stakeholder engagement to build trust and ensure
equitable outcomes.
In conclusion, occupational diseases in high-risk industries
represent a significant challenge that requires innovative
solutions to enhance workplace safety and worker well-
being. AI and ML offer transformative potential in this
regard, enabling predictive modeling, real-time monitoring,
and proactive interventions. While case studies demonstrate
the effectiveness of these technologies, significant gaps in
traditional health management systems and challenges
related to data privacy, fairness, and implementation must be
addressed to realize their full potential. Developing
comprehensive frameworks that integrate AI and ML into
occupational health management can bridge these gaps,
paving the way for safer and healthier workplaces in high-
risk industries.
3. Methodology
The study utilizes the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) method to
systematically review literature and conceptualize a
framework for leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and
machine learning (ML) in predicting occupational diseases
and managing health risks in high-risk industries. The
PRISMA method ensures transparency and replicability,
involving four primary phases: identification, screening,
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
931 | P a g e
eligibility, and inclusion.
Initially, a comprehensive literature search was conducted
using scholarly databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web
of Science, and Google Scholar. Keywords were formulated
based on the scope of the study, including "artificial
intelligence," "machine learning," "occupational diseases,"
"health risk prediction," and "high-risk industries." Boolean
operators (AND, OR) were employed to combine search
terms and refine results. The search was limited to articles
published in English from 2010 to 2023, ensuring relevance
and capturing recent advancements in AI and ML
applications in occupational health and safety.
Duplicates were removed using bibliographic management
software. Titles and abstracts were screened against inclusion
criteria, which focused on studies addressing AI and ML in
occupational health, predictive analytics, and health risk
management in high-risk industries such as mining,
construction, and oil and gas. Articles were excluded if they
did not address AI/ML applications or occupational health
directly or if they were not empirical, review-based, or
theoretical studies.
Full-text articles that passed the screening phase were
assessed for eligibility based on predefined criteria: relevance
to the study’s objective, methodological rigor, and
contributions to the conceptual framework of AI and ML in
occupational disease prediction. Studies that lacked
methodological transparency or presented redundant findings
were excluded. The final dataset included 102 articles
deemed highly relevant and credible for analysis.
Data extraction focused on study objectives, methodologies,
AI/ML techniques employed, industries covered, and key
findings. Extracted data were synthesized to identify
recurring themes, gaps, and opportunities for integrating
AI/ML into occupational health risk management
frameworks. Special attention was given to studies
addressing predictive analytics, real-time monitoring, and
proactive risk management strategies.
Using thematic synthesis, the extracted data informed the
conceptual framework's development, integrating insights
from the reviewed literature. The framework emphasizes the
role of AI/ML in identifying early warning signals of
occupational diseases, predicting disease patterns, and
mitigating risks through proactive interventions. Case
studies, such as Abbasi's (2018) exploration of mining safety
hazards and Abdul Hamid's (2022) OSH framework
development, provided empirical validation of the
framework's applicability.
The flowchart for the PRISMA methodology visually
represents the systematic review process, illustrating the flow
of studies through the four phases. It includes the number of
studies identified, screened, assessed for eligibility, and
included in the final analysis. The flowchart in figure 3
visually represents the PRISMA methodology used in the
systematic review. It illustrates the flow of studies through
the identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion phases,
along with the corresponding number of records at each
stage.
Fig 3: PRISMA Flow chart of the study methodology
4. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for leveraging AI and machine
learning (ML) to predict occupational diseases and
implement proactive health risk management in high-risk
industries is built around three key components: data
acquisition, predictive modeling, and intervention strategies.
Together, these components create a system capable of
identifying, analyzing, and mitigating health risks in real-
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
932 | P a g e
time, reducing the prevalence of occupational diseases and
improving workplace safety.
Data acquisition is the foundation of the framework, relying
on advanced technologies to collect comprehensive
information on workplace conditions and worker health.
Wearable devices, such as fitness trackers and smart helmets,
monitor physiological parameters like heart rate, respiration,
fatigue levels, and physical activity. IoT sensors embedded in
workplace environments capture environmental data,
including air quality, temperature, humidity, noise levels, and
the presence of toxic substances (Avwioroko, 2023, Guo,
Tian & Li, 2022, Odionu, et al, 2022). Behavioral data, such
as task patterns, posture, and movement, is also collected to
assess ergonomic risks. Together, these data sources provide
a multidimensional view of workplace conditions, allowing
for a granular understanding of the factors contributing to
occupational diseases.
Predictive modeling is the second component, utilizing
machine learning algorithms to analyze the collected data and
identify potential health risks. Algorithms such as neural
networks, decision trees, and support vector machines are
applied to uncover patterns and correlations between
workplace conditions and health outcomes. For example, a
neural network can process large datasets to detect early
indicators of respiratory disorders based on air quality and
physiological data, while decision trees can identify
ergonomic risks by analyzing posture and movement patterns
(Aziza, Uzougbo & Ugwu, 2023, Joseph, 2020, Oh, 2023).
Risk factor identification through predictive modeling
enables early intervention, preventing the escalation of health
issues. Additionally, these models continuously improve
their accuracy by learning from new data, ensuring they
remain adaptive to changing workplace conditions and
worker behaviors.
Intervention strategies form the final component, translating
insights from predictive modeling into actionable measures.
Personalized health recommendations are provided to
workers based on their unique risk profiles, such as
suggesting rest periods, hydration, or protective gear.
Workplace design improvements, informed by ergonomic
data, address physical risks by optimizing workstation
layouts, equipment design, and task scheduling. Preventive
health measures, including targeted wellness programs and
educational initiatives, further reduce the likelihood of
occupational diseases (Purohit, et al, 2018, Sabeti, 2023,
Sileyew, 2020). These interventions are tailored to address
specific risks identified through the framework, ensuring a
proactive approach to health management.
Cross-disciplinary integration is essential for the effective
implementation of this framework, requiring collaboration
among engineers, healthcare professionals, and
policymakers. Engineers play a crucial role in designing and
deploying wearable devices, IoT sensors, and workplace
monitoring systems. Their expertise ensures that these
technologies are reliable, accurate, and seamlessly integrated
into industrial environments (Benson, et al, 2021, Gutterman,
2020, Olawepo, Seedat-Khan & Ehiane, 2021). Healthcare
professionals provide medical insights and validate the
health-related data collected through these technologies,
ensuring that interventions are both scientifically sound and
effective. Policymakers create the regulatory environment
necessary for the adoption of this framework, establishing
standards for data privacy, safety, and compliance. Their
involvement ensures that the framework aligns with national
and international health and safety regulations, fostering trust
and accountability among stakeholders. Alanazi, 2022,
proposed Architecture of proposed disease and risk
prediction system as shown in figure 4.
Fig 4: Architecture of proposed disease and risk prediction system (Alanazi, 2022).
The implementation roadmap for this framework involves
several critical steps to ensure its successful integration into
organizational health systems. The first step is conducting a
needs assessment to identify the specific occupational health
challenges faced by an organization. This includes evaluating
existing health management practices, understanding
workplace hazards, and determining the technological
infrastructure required for the framework (Ahirwar &
Tripathi, 2021, Hassam, et al, 2023, Uwumiro, et al, 2023).
Next, organizations must invest in the necessary technology,
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
933 | P a g e
including wearable devices, IoT sensors, and data analytics
platforms, tailored to their operational requirements. Training
programs for workers and managers are essential to build
awareness and competence in using these technologies,
fostering a culture of safety and proactive health
management.
Data collection and baseline analysis follow, establishing a
reference point for workplace conditions and worker health.
This step involves deploying monitoring technologies and
collecting initial data to identify existing risks and
vulnerabilities. Predictive modeling algorithms are then
developed and fine-tuned using the collected data, ensuring
that they accurately identify health risks specific to the
organization (Ajayi & Thwala, 2015, Ji, 2019, Muley, et al,
2023). Once the framework is operational, organizations
must implement intervention strategies based on the insights
generated, continuously monitoring and adjusting these
measures to maximize their effectiveness.
Regular evaluation and feedback loops are integral to the
framework’s sustainability. Organizations must assess the
impact of the framework through metrics such as reduced
illness rates, improved worker well-being, and enhanced
productivity. Feedback from workers, engineers, and
healthcare professionals is used to refine the framework,
addressing any gaps or limitations. Collaboration with
policymakers ensures that the framework remains aligned
with evolving regulations and standards, fostering its long-
term adoption and scalability (Yang, et al, 2023, Zurub,
2021).
In conclusion, the conceptual framework for leveraging AI
and ML to predict occupational diseases offers a
comprehensive approach to proactive health risk
management in high-risk industries. By integrating data
acquisition, predictive modeling, and intervention strategies,
the framework addresses the root causes of occupational
diseases and promotes a safer, healthier work environment.
Cross-disciplinary collaboration and a structured
implementation roadmap ensure that the framework is
adaptable, effective, and sustainable, providing a foundation
for improved occupational health practices across industries
and regions.
5. Case study applications
The conceptual framework for leveraging AI and machine
learning (ML) to predict occupational diseases has been
tested in various high-risk industries, including mining,
construction, and manufacturing. These industries are
characterized by their inherent risks, such as exposure to
hazardous substances, repetitive physical tasks, and extreme
environmental conditions, which make workers particularly
vulnerable to occupational diseases. By applying the
framework in these settings, organizations have
demonstrated how data-driven approaches can transform
health risk management, reduce the prevalence of
occupational illnesses, and enhance overall workplace safety
and productivity (Avwioroko, 2023, Haupt & Pillay, 2016,
Mcintyre, Scofield & Trammell, 2019).
In the mining sector, where workers are frequently exposed
to harmful particulates and toxic gases, the implementation
of AI and ML technologies has yielded significant results.
Wearable devices and IoT sensors were deployed to monitor
air quality, temperature, and the presence of toxic substances
such as methane and silica dust. Workers were equipped with
smart helmets that measured physiological parameters,
including heart rate, respiratory rate, and fatigue levels
(Akinwale & Olusanya, 2016, John, 2023, Nwaogu, 2022).
The data collected from these devices was analyzed using
predictive algorithms to identify patterns indicative of
respiratory disorders, such as silicosis and chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Early detection of
these conditions enabled timely interventions, such as
increasing ventilation in hazardous areas, rotating shifts to
limit exposure, and providing workers with personalized
protective equipment. The use of predictive modeling also
allowed mining companies to proactively address risks,
resulting in a measurable decline in respiratory illness cases
and an overall improvement in worker health (Azimpour &
Khosravi, 2023, Chisholm,et al, 2021, Obi, et al, 2023).
Similarly, the construction industry has benefited from the
application of the framework, particularly in addressing
musculoskeletal disorders caused by repetitive motions and
heavy lifting. Wearable sensors tracked workers’
movements, posture, and physical strain during tasks.
Machine learning algorithms analyzed this data to identify
ergonomic risks, such as improper lifting techniques and
sustained awkward postures (Popendorf, 2019, Schulte, et al,
2022, Wood & Fabbri, 2019). Based on the insights
generated, ergonomic interventions were implemented,
including redesigning workstations, introducing lifting aids,
and conducting targeted training programs. The results
showed a substantial reduction in musculoskeletal injuries,
leading to fewer worker absences and improved job
satisfaction. Additionally, predictive analytics enabled real-
time feedback to workers, promoting safer practices and
reducing the likelihood of injuries.
The manufacturing sector, known for its reliance on heavy
machinery and assembly-line processes, has also
demonstrated the effectiveness of the framework. IoT-
enabled devices monitored noise levels, vibration, and
temperature in the work environment, while wearable devices
tracked workers’ vital signs and fatigue levels (Aksoy, et al,
2023, Hughes, Anund & Falkmer, 2016, Podgorski, et al,
2017). Predictive models identified risks associated with
noise-induced hearing loss and heat-related illnesses,
allowing organizations to implement preventive measures.
For example, workers were provided with noise-canceling
headsets and access to cooling zones, while production
schedules were adjusted to minimize exposure to extreme
conditions. The real-time health surveillance systems also
enabled managers to identify fatigue patterns, prompting
them to schedule breaks and reassign tasks as needed. These
measures not only reduced occupational illnesses but also
enhanced operational efficiency, as workers performed their
tasks in safer and more comfortable conditions.
The results from these case studies underscore the
transformative potential of leveraging AI and ML in
occupational health management. Early detection of
occupational diseases was a recurring theme across all
industries, demonstrating the framework’s ability to identify
risks before they escalated into severe health issues. By
integrating real-time monitoring with predictive analytics,
organizations were able to anticipate and address health risks
proactively, shifting from a reactive to a preventive approach
(Akyıldız, 2023, Ikwuanusi, et al, 2022, Olabode, Adesanya
& Bakare, 2017). This proactive stance not only improved
worker health but also reduced costs associated with medical
treatment, compensation claims, and lost productivity.
Improvements in workplace safety and productivity were also
evident in each case study. The implementation of ergonomic
interventions, tailored health programs, and environmental
adjustments created safer and more conducive work
environments. Workers reported higher levels of job
satisfaction and engagement, attributing these improvements
to the organization’s commitment to their well-being. The
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
934 | P a g e
reduction in absenteeism and turnover rates further
highlighted the long-term benefits of the framework, as
healthier workers contributed to more stable and efficient
operations (Al-Dulaimi, 2021, Jetha, et al, 2023, Ndegwa,
2015).
These insights demonstrate that the conceptual framework is
not limited to specific industries but can be adapted to address
the unique challenges of various high-risk sectors. The ability
to collect and analyze diverse types of data—physiological,
environmental, and behavioral—ensures that the framework
is versatile and scalable. Moreover, the use of machine
learning algorithms, which continuously learn and improve
from new data, ensures that the system remains dynamic and
responsive to evolving workplace conditions.
In conclusion, the application of the conceptual framework in
mining, construction, and manufacturing has provided
compelling evidence of its effectiveness in reducing
occupational diseases and improving workplace safety. By
harnessing the power of AI and ML, these industries have
demonstrated that proactive health risk management is both
achievable and beneficial, offering a pathway to healthier,
safer, and more productive work environments. As
organizations continue to adopt and refine this framework,
the potential for broader application across other high-risk
industries and regions becomes increasingly clear, paving the
way for a new era in occupational health management.
6. Discussion
The conceptual framework for leveraging AI and machine
learning (ML) to predict occupational diseases offers
transformative implications for health risk management in
high-risk industries. Its primary strength lies in facilitating
the transition from a reactive approach, which focuses on
addressing occupational diseases after their onset, to a
proactive model centered on early detection, prevention, and
intervention. This shift represents a significant paradigm
change in occupational health, where traditional methods
often rely on periodic health checks and workplace audits that
fail to provide real-time insights or predictive capabilities
(Alhamdani, et al, 2018, Jilcha & Kitaw, 2016, Kirwan,
2017). By integrating AI and ML technologies, the
framework enables continuous monitoring and risk
prediction, allowing organizations to identify and mitigate
health risks before they manifest as severe illnesses or
workplace incidents.
One of the most impactful implications of the framework is
its ability to improve workforce health and productivity.
Early detection of risks, such as respiratory issues caused by
poor air quality or musculoskeletal disorders linked to
repetitive tasks, allows organizations to implement timely
interventions. These may include ergonomic adjustments,
targeted training, or personalized health recommendations
(Avwioroko, 2023, Ikpegbu, 2015, Nagaty, 2023). As a
result, workers experience reduced physical strain and stress,
leading to fewer absences, lower turnover rates, and
enhanced job satisfaction. Additionally, the data-driven
nature of the framework ensures that resources are allocated
effectively, optimizing safety measures and interventions
based on actual risks rather than assumptions.
However, the implementation of this framework is not
without challenges and limitations. Technological barriers
are among the most significant hurdles. The adoption of
advanced AI and ML systems requires substantial investment
in infrastructure, such as wearable devices, IoT sensors, and
data analytics platforms. Smaller organizations with limited
budgets may struggle to afford these technologies, creating
disparities in access to proactive health management
solutions (Nwaogu & Chan, 2021Zanke, 2022). Furthermore,
integrating these systems into existing workplace
environments can be technically complex, particularly in
industries with legacy systems or limited digital
infrastructure.
Organizational barriers also pose challenges to the
framework’s success. Resistance to change is common, as
workers and managers may be skeptical of new technologies
or fear that wearable devices and sensors could be used for
surveillance rather than health monitoring. Building trust and
fostering a culture of safety and innovation is essential for
overcoming these barriers. This requires clear
communication about the purpose and benefits of the
framework, as well as training programs to ensure that
workers and managers are equipped to use the technologies
effectively (Shi, et al, 2022, Tamoor, et al, 2023, Xiao, et al,
2019). Additionally, organizations must develop cross-
disciplinary teams that include engineers, healthcare
professionals, and safety officers to facilitate the seamless
implementation and operation of the framework.
Ethical and regulatory considerations are critical to the
successful deployment of AI and ML in occupational health
management. Data security is a primary concern, as wearable
devices and monitoring systems collect sensitive personal
information about workers. Ensuring that this data is stored,
processed, and shared securely is essential to protecting
worker privacy and maintaining trust (Alkhaldi, Pathirage &
Kulatunga, 2017, Narayanan, et al, 2023). Organizations
must implement robust data governance policies, including
encryption, anonymization, and access controls, to prevent
unauthorized access or misuse of data.
Compliance with health and safety standards is another key
consideration. The framework must align with national and
international regulations, such as those established by the
International Labour Organization (ILO) and the World
Health Organization (WHO). These regulations provide
guidelines for workplace safety, data protection, and ethical
use of technology, ensuring that the framework adheres to
best practices and legal requirements. Organizations must
also stay informed about evolving regulatory landscapes, as
advancements in AI and ML may lead to new standards and
requirements over time (Altuntas & Mutlu, 2021, Ilankoon,
et al, 2018, Patel, et al, 2022). Fairness and equity are
additional ethical concerns that must be addressed. AI and
ML algorithms are only as unbiased as the data used to train
them. If historical data contains biases, such as
underreporting of certain health risks for specific worker
demographics, the algorithms may perpetuate these biases,
leading to unequal treatment or risk assessment. To mitigate
this, organizations must ensure that the data used for training
and analysis is representative and free from systemic biases.
Regular audits of algorithm performance and outcomes can
help identify and address any disparities.
Despite these challenges, the framework has the potential to
revolutionize occupational health management in high-risk
industries by fostering a culture of proactive health and
safety. Its scalability and adaptability make it applicable
across various sectors and regions, addressing the unique
challenges of different workplace environments.
Furthermore, as AI and ML technologies continue to
advance, the framework will become increasingly
sophisticated, enabling more accurate predictions and
personalized interventions (Anger, et al, 2015, Ingrao, et al,
2018, Osakwe, 2021).
In conclusion, the conceptual framework for leveraging AI
and ML to predict occupational diseases represents a
significant advancement in health risk management. By
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
935 | P a g e
transitioning from reactive to proactive approaches, it offers
substantial benefits for worker health, organizational
productivity, and workplace safety. However, addressing
technological and organizational barriers, as well as ensuring
ethical and regulatory compliance, is essential to its
successful implementation (Ansar, et al, 2021, Efobi, et al,
2023, Khalid, et al, 2018). With the right strategies and
support, this framework has the potential to redefine
occupational health management and set a new standard for
safety in high-risk industries.
7. Conclusion and Recommendations
The conceptual framework for leveraging AI and machine
learning (ML) to predict occupational diseases offers
transformative potential in high-risk industries. By
integrating advanced technologies, the framework enables a
proactive approach to health risk management, focusing on
early detection, prevention, and timely interventions. Its
benefits are multifaceted, addressing critical challenges such
as the high prevalence of respiratory disorders,
musculoskeletal injuries, and other occupational diseases.
Through real-time data acquisition, predictive modeling, and
targeted interventions, the framework enhances workplace
safety, improves worker health and well-being, and boosts
organizational productivity. It also reduces costs associated
with absenteeism, healthcare, and workplace injuries,
providing long-term economic advantages for industries.
For policymakers and industry leaders, the adoption of this
framework necessitates strategic planning and supportive
measures. Policymakers should prioritize the development
and enforcement of regulations that mandate the use of health
surveillance technologies and ergonomic practices in high-
risk industries. Incentives such as tax benefits, grants, or
subsidies can encourage organizations, particularly small and
medium-sized enterprises, to invest in the required
technologies. Policymakers must also establish clear
guidelines for data privacy and ethical use of AI and ML,
ensuring compliance with international standards and
fostering trust among stakeholders.
Industry leaders play a crucial role in the successful
implementation of the framework. They should allocate
resources to adopt wearable devices, IoT sensors, and data
analytics platforms, ensuring that these technologies are
integrated seamlessly into existing operations. Training
programs for workers and managers are essential to build
awareness and competence in using the framework, fostering
a culture of safety and innovation. Collaboration between
engineers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers can
further enhance the framework’s effectiveness, promoting
cross-disciplinary expertise and shared responsibility for
workplace health.
Future research should focus on optimizing and scaling the
framework to suit diverse contexts and industries. Studies
exploring its application in sectors such as healthcare,
agriculture, and logistics would provide valuable insights into
its adaptability. Research into advanced AI algorithms and
data analytics techniques could further improve the accuracy
and efficiency of predictive modeling, enabling more precise
risk assessments. Additionally, examining the long-term
impact of the framework on organizational outcomes, such as
productivity and worker retention, would strengthen its value
proposition. Ethical considerations, including fairness in
algorithm design and equitable access to health technologies,
should remain a priority in future investigations.
In conclusion, this framework represents a significant step
forward in addressing occupational health challenges in high-
risk industries. By leveraging AI and ML, it provides a
proactive and data-driven solution to reduce occupational
diseases and enhance workplace safety. Through supportive
policies, industry commitment, and ongoing research, the
framework can be refined and expanded, setting a new
standard for health risk management and contributing to
safer, healthier, and more productive work environments
globally.
8. References
1. Abbasi S. Defining safety hazards and risks in mining
industry: a case study in United States. Asian Journal of
Applied Sciences and Technology (AJAST).
2018;2(2):1071–8.
2. Abdul Hamid S. Development of occupational safety and
health (OSH) performance management framework for
industries in Malaysia [dissertation]. Batu Pahat:
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia; 2022.
3. Adams ML. Understanding the skills, traits, attributes,
and environmental health and safety (EHS)-related
education and professional certifications desired by
direct supervisors of entry-level EHS positions
[dissertation]. Indiana, PA: Indiana University of
Pennsylvania; 2023.
4. Adefemi A, Ukpoju EA, Adekoya O, Abatan A,
Adegbite AO. Artificial intelligence in environmental
health and public safety: a comprehensive review of
USA strategies. World Journal of Advanced Research
and Reviews. 2023;20(3):1420–34.
5. Ahirwar R, Tripathi AK. E-waste management: A
review of recycling process, environmental and
occupational health hazards, and potential solutions.
Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring &
Management. 2021;15:100409.
6. Ajayi O, Thwala WD. Developing an integrated design
model for construction ergonomics in Nigeria
construction industry. African Journal of Applied
Research. 2015;1(1):n.p.
7. Akinwale AA, Olusanya OA. Implications of
occupational health and safety intelligence in Nigeria.
African Journal of Applied Research. 2016;1(1):n.p.
8. Aksoy S, Demircioglu P, Bogrekci I, Durakbasa MN.
Enhancing human safety in production environments
within the scope of Industry 5.0. In: The International
Symposium for Production Research. Cham: Springer
Nature Switzerland; 2023. p. 200–12.
9. Akyıldız C. Integration of digitalization into
occupational health and safety and its applicability: a
literature review. The European Research Journal.
2023;9(6):1509–19.
10. Alanazi R. Identification and prediction of chronic
diseases using machine learning approach. Journal of
Healthcare Engineering. 2022;2022:2826127.
11. Al-Dulaimi JAE. IoT system engineering approach using
AI for managing safety products in healthcare and
workplaces [dissertation]. London: Brunel University
London; 2021.
12. Alhamdani YA, Hassim MH, Shaik SM, Jalil AA.
Hybrid tool for occupational health risk assessment and
fugitive emissions control in chemical processes based
on the source, path, and receptor concept. Process Safety
and Environmental Protection. 2018;118:348–60.
13. Alkhaldi M, Pathirage C, Kulatunga U. The role of
human error in accidents within the oil and gas industry
in Bahrain. International Journal of Occupational Safety
and Ergonomics. 2017;23(1):12–9.
14. Altuntas S, Mutlu NG. Developing an integrated
conceptual framework for monitoring and controlling
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
936 | P a g e
risks related to occupational health and safety. Journal of
Engineering Research. 2021;9(4A):n.p.
15. Anger WK, Elliot DL, Bodner T, Olson R, Rohlman DS,
Truxillo DM, et al Effectiveness of total worker health
interventions. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology. 2015;20(2):226–37.
16. Ansar MA, Assawadithalerd M, Tipmanee D, Laokiat L,
Khamdahsag P, Kittipongvises S. Occupational
exposure to hazards and volatile organic compounds in
small-scale plastic recycling plants in Thailand by
integrating risk and life cycle assessment concepts.
Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021;329:129582.
17. Ashri R. The AI-powered workplace: How artificial
intelligence, data, and messaging platforms are defining
the future of work. New York: Apress; 2019.
18. Avwioroko A. Biomass gasification for hydrogen
production. Engineering Science & Technology Journal.
2023;4(2):56–70.
19. Avwioroko A. The integration of smart grid technology
with carbon credit trading systems: benefits, challenges,
and future directions. Engineering Science &
Technology Journal. 2023;4(2):33–45.
20. Avwioroko A. The potential, barriers, and strategies to
upscale renewable energy adoption in developing
countries: Nigeria as a case study. Engineering Science
& Technology Journal. 2023;4(2):46–55.
21. Avwioroko A. Biomass gasification for hydrogen
production. Engineering Science & Technology Journal.
2023;4:56–70. doi:10.51594/estj.v4i2.1289.
22. Azimpour F, Khosravi H. An investigation of the
workers’ rights in difficult and hazardous occupations.
Russian Law Journal. 2023;11(12S):634–48.
23. Aziza OR, Uzougbo NS, Ugwu MC. The impact of
artificial intelligence on regulatory compliance in the oil
and gas industry. World Journal of Advanced Research
and Reviews. 2023;19(3):1559–70.
24. Azizi H, Aaleagha MM, Azadbakht B, Samadyar H.
Identification and assessment of health, safety, and
environmental risk factors of chemical industry using
Delphi and FMEA methods (a case study).
Anthropogenic Pollution. 2022;6(2):n.p.
25. Benson C. Occupational health and safety implications
in the oil and gas industry, Nigeria [dissertation].
Nicosia: European University of Cyprus; 2021.
26. Benson C, Dimopoulos C, Argyropoulos CD,
Mikellidou CV, Boustras G. Assessing the common
occupational health hazards and their health risks among
oil and gas workers. Safety Science. 2021;140:105284.
27. Bevilacqua M, Ciarapica FE. Human factor risk
management in the process industry: a case study.
Reliability Engineering & System Safety.
2018;169:149–59.
28. Bidemi AI, Oyindamola FO, Odum I, Stanley OE, Atta
JA, Olatomide AM, et al Challenges facing menstruating
adolescents: A reproductive health approach.
Reproductive Health Journal. 2021;1(1):n.p.
29. Chisholm JM, Zamani R, Negm AM, Said N, Abdel
Daiem MM, Dibaj M, Akrami M. Sustainable waste
management of medical waste in African developing
countries: A narrative review. Waste Management &
Research. 2021;39(9):1149–63.
30. Cosner CC. Industrial hygiene in the pharmaceutical and
consumer healthcare industries. Boca Raton: CRC Press;
2023.
31. Dong Z, Liu Y, Duan L, Bekele D, Naidu R.
Uncertainties in human health risk assessment of
environmental contaminants: A review and perspective.
Environment International. 2015;85:120–32.
32. Efobi CC, Nri-ezedi CA, Madu CS, Obi E, Ikediashi CC,
Ejiofor O. A retrospective study on gender-related
differences in clinical events of sickle cell disease: A
single-centre experience. Tropical Journal of Medical
Research. 2023;22(1):137–44.
33. Elumalai V, Brindha K, Lakshmanan E. Human
exposure risk assessment due to heavy metals in
groundwater by pollution index and multivariate
statistical methods: A case study from South Africa.
Water. 2017;9(4):234.
34. Fargnoli M, Lombardi M. Preliminary human safety
assessment (PHSA) for the improvement of the
behavioral aspects of safety climate in the construction
industry. Buildings. 2019;9(3):69.
35. Fontes C, Hohma E, Corrigan CC, Lütge C. AI-powered
public surveillance systems: Why we (might) need them
and how we want them. Technology in Society.
2022;71:102137.
36. Friis RH. Occupational health and safety for the 21st
century. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers; 2015.
37. Ganiyu IO. A conceptual framework to measure the
effectiveness of work-life balance strategies in selected
manufacturing firms, Lagos metropolis, Nigeria
[dissertation]. Lagos: n.p.; 2018.
38. Guo P, Tian W, Li H. Dynamic health risk assessment
model for construction dust hazards in the reuse of
industrial buildings. Building and Environment.
2022;210:108736.
39. Gutterman AS. Environmental, health and safety
committee. Health and Safety Committee.
2020;December 1:n.p.
40. Guzman J, Recoco GA, Padrones JM, Ignacio JJ.
Evaluating workplace safety in the oil and gas industry
during the COVID-19 pandemic using occupational
health and safety vulnerability measure and partial least
square structural equation modelling. Cleaner
Engineering and Technology. 2022;6:100378.
41. Gwenzi W, Chaukura N. Organic contaminants in
African aquatic systems: Current knowledge, health
risks, and future research directions. Science of the Total
Environment. 2018;619:1493–514.
42. Hassam SF, Hassan ND, Akbar J, Esa MM. AI-enabled
real-time workplace health monitoring system.
Greetings from Rector of Bandung Islamic University
Prof. Dr. H. Edi Setiadi, SH, MH. 2023;98:n.p.
43. Haupt TC, Pillay K. Investigating the true costs of
construction accidents. Journal of Engineering, Design
and Technology. 2016;14(2):373–419.
44. Herath HMKKMB, Mittal M. Adoption of artificial
intelligence in smart cities: A comprehensive review.
International Journal of Information Management Data
Insights. 2022;2(1):100076.
45. Hughes BP, Anund A, Falkmer T. A comprehensive
conceptual framework for road safety strategies.
Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2016;90:13–28.
46. Ikpegbu MA. Implementation of occupational safety and
health management system in reducing ergonomic risk
among certified and uncertified automotive industry
workers. Occupational Health Journal. 2015;1(1):n.p.
47. Ikwuanusi UF, Azubuike C, Odionu CS, Sule AK.
Leveraging AI to address resource allocation challenges
in academic and research libraries. IRE Journals.
2022;5(10):311.
48. Ilankoon IMSK, Ghorbani Y, Chong MN, Herath G,
Moyo T, Petersen J. E-waste in the international context–
A review of trade flows, regulations, hazards, waste
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
937 | P a g e
management strategies and technologies for value
recovery. Waste Management. 2018;82:258–75.
49. Ingrao C, Faccilongo N, Di Gioia L, Messineo A. Food
waste recovery into energy in a circular economy
perspective: A comprehensive review of aspects related
to plant operation and environmental assessment.
Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018;184:869–92.
50. Jetha A, Bakhtari H, Rosella LC, Gignac MA, Biswas A,
Shahidi FV, et al Artificial intelligence and the work–
health interface: A research agenda for a technologically
transforming world of work. American Journal of
Industrial Medicine. 2023;66(10):815–30.
51. Ji Z. Optimising manufacturing industrial production
layout for occupational health and safety. Manufacturing
Health Journal. 2019;1(1):n.p.
52. Jilcha K, Kitaw D. A literature review on global
occupational safety and health practice & accidents
severity. International Journal for Quality Research.
2016;10(2):n.p.
53. John PA. Artificial intelligence technology application
and occupational safety in downstream petroleum
industries in Greater Accra [dissertation]. Cape Coast:
University of Cape Coast; 2023.
54. Joseph AJ. Health, safety, and environmental data
analysis: A business approach. Boca Raton: CRC Press;
2020.
55. Jung S, Woo J, Kang C. Analysis of severe industrial
accidents caused by hazardous chemicals in South Korea
from January 2008 to June 2018. Safety Science.
2020;124:104580.
56. Kamunda C, Mathuthu M, Madhuku M. Health risk
assessment of heavy metals in soils from Witwatersrand
Gold Mining Basin, South Africa. International Journal
of Environmental Research and Public Health.
2016;13(7):663.
57. Kasperson RE, Kasperson JX, Hohenemser C, Kates
RW, Svenson O. Managing hazards at PETROCHEM
Corporation. In: Corporate management of health and
safety hazards. Routledge; 2019. p. 15–41.
58. Keating GC. Is cost-benefit analysis the only game in
town? S. Cal. L. Rev. 2017;91:195.
59. Khalid S, Shahid M, Natasha B, Bibi I, Sarwar T, Shah
AH, et al A review of environmental contamination and
health risk assessment of wastewater use for crop
irrigation with a focus on low- and high-income
countries. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health. 2018;15(5):895.
60. Kirwan B. A guide to practical human reliability
assessment. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017.
61. Lee J, Cameron I, Hassall M. Improving process safety:
What roles for digitalization and Industry 4.0? Process
Safety and Environmental Protection. 2019;132:325–39.
62. Lewis KA, Tzilivakis J, Warner DJ, Green A. An
international database for pesticide risk assessments and
management. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment:
An International Journal. 2016;22(4):1050–64.
63. Loeppke RR, Hohn T, Baase C, Bunn WB, Burton WN,
Eisenberg BS, et al Integrating health and safety in the
workplace: How closely aligning health and safety
strategies can yield measurable benefits. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
2015;57(5):585–97.
64. Lohse R, Zhivov A. Deep energy retrofit guide for public
buildings: Business and financial models. Cham:
Springer; 2019.
65. McIntyre A, Scofield H, Trammell S. Environmental
health and safety (EHS) auditing. In: Handbook of
Occupational Safety and Health. 2019;613–37.
66. Muley A, Muzumdar P, Kurian G, Basyal GP. Risk of
AI in healthcare: A comprehensive literature review and
study framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.14530.
2023.
67. Nagaty KA. IoT commercial and industrial applications
and AI-powered IoT. In: Frontiers of Quality Electronic
Design (QED) AI, IoT and Hardware Security. Cham:
Springer International Publishing; 2023. p. 465–500.
68. Narayanan DK, Ravoof AA, Jayapriya J, Revathi G,
Murugan M. Hazards in oil, gas, and petrochemical
industries. In: Crises in Oil, Gas and Petrochemical
Industries. Elsevier; 2023. p. 71–99.
69. Ndegwa PW. Perceptual measures of determinants of
implementation of occupational safety and health
programmes in the manufacturing sector in Kenya
[dissertation]. 2015.
70. Nunfam VF, Adusei-Asante K, Van Etten EJ,
Oosthuizen J, Adams S, Frimpong K. The nexus between
social impacts and adaptation strategies of workers to
occupational heat stress: A conceptual framework.
International Journal of Biometeorology. 2019;63:1693–
706.
71. Nwaogu JM. An integrated approach to improve mental
health among construction personnel in Nigeria.
Occupational Health Journal. 2022;1(1):n.p.
72. Nwaogu JM, Chan AP. Evaluation of multi-level
intervention strategies for a psychologically healthy
construction workplace in Nigeria. Journal of
Engineering, Design and Technology. 2021;19(2):509–
36.
73. Obi ES, Devdat LNU, Ehimwenma NO, Tobalesi O,
Iklaki W, Arslan F. Immune thrombocytopenia: A rare
adverse event of vancomycin therapy. Cureus.
2023;15(5):n.p.
74. Odionu CS, Azubuike C, Ikwuanusi UF, Sule AK. Data
analytics in banking to optimize resource allocation and
reduce operational costs. IRE Journals. 2022;5(12):302.
75. Oh J. Innovation in HSE management for sustainable
development [master’s thesis]. 2023.
76. Olabode SO, Adesanya AR, Bakare AA. Ergonomics
awareness and employee performance: An exploratory
study. Economic and Environmental Studies.
2017;17(44):813–29.
77. Olawepo Q, Seedat-Khan M, Ehiane S. An overview of
occupational safety and health systems in Nigeria.
Alternation. 2021.
78. Olu O. Resilient health system as conceptual framework
for strengthening public health disaster risk
management: An African viewpoint. Frontiers in Public
Health. 2017;5:263.
79. Oranusi SU, Dahunsi SO, Idowu SA. Assessment of
occupational diseases among artisans and factory
workers in Ifo, Nigeria. Occupational Health Journal.
2014;1(1):n.p.
80. Osakwe KA. The possibilities of simultaneous operation
(SIMOPs) and practicality of positive pressure habitat in
a hazardous industry: Where process safety meets
occupational hygiene. Current Journal of Applied
Science and Technology. 2021;40(13):28–37.
81. Patel V, Chesmore A, Legner CM, Pandey S. Trends in
workplace wearable technologies and connected-worker
solutions for next-generation occupational safety, health,
and productivity. Advanced Intelligent Systems.
2022;4(1):2100099.
82. Podgorski D, Majchrzycka K, Dąbrowska A, Gralewicz
G, Okrasa M. Towards a conceptual framework of OSH
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation www.allmultidisciplinaryjournal.com
938 | P a g e
risk management in smart working environments based
on smart PPE, ambient intelligence and the Internet of
Things technologies. International Journal of
Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2017;23(1):1–20.
83. Popendorf W. Industrial hygiene control of airborne
chemical hazards. CRC Press; 2019.
84. Purohit DP, Siddiqui NA, Nandan A, Yadav BP. Hazard
identification and risk assessment in construction
industry. International Journal of Applied Engineering
Research. 2018;13(10):7639–67.
85. Redinger C. Benchmarking in international safety and
health. In: Global Occupational Safety and Health
Management Handbook. CRC Press; 2019. p. 95–112.
86. Ruhrer B. The value of occupational health nursing.
2016.
87. Sabeti S. Advancing safety in roadway work zones with
worker-centred augmented reality: Assessing the
feasibility, usability, and effectiveness of AR-enabled
warning systems [dissertation]. The University of North
Carolina at Charlotte; 2023.
88. Schulte PA, Iavicoli I, Fontana L, Leka S, Dollard MF,
Salmen-Navarro A, et al Occupational safety and health
staging framework for decent work. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
2022;19(17):10842.
89. Shad MK, Lai FW, Fatt CL, Klemeš JJ, Bokhari A.
Integrating sustainability reporting into enterprise risk
management and its relationship with business
performance: A conceptual framework. Journal of
Cleaner Production. 2019;208:415–25.
90. Shi B, Su S, Wen C, Wang T, Xu H, Liu M. The
prediction of occupational health risks of benzene in the
printing industry through multiple occupational health
risk assessment models. Frontiers in Public Health.
2022;10:1038608.
91. Shi H, Zeng M, Peng H, Huang C, Sun H, Hou Q, et al
Health risk assessment of heavy metals in groundwater
of Hainan Island using the Monte Carlo simulation
coupled with the APCS/MLR model. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
2022;19(13):7827.
92. Sileyew KJ. Systematic industrial OSH advancement
factors identification for manufacturing industries: A
case of Ethiopia. Safety Science. 2020;132:104989.
93. Tamoor M, Imran HM, Chaudhry IG. Revolutionizing
construction site safety through artificial intelligence.
Journal of Development and Social Sciences.
2023;4(3):1099–104.
94. Tranter M. Occupational hygiene and risk management.
Routledge; 2020.
95. Uwumiro F, Nebuwa C, Nwevo CO, Okpujie V,
Osemwota O, Obi ES, et al Cardiovascular event
predictors in hospitalized chronic kidney disease (CKD)
patients: A nationwide inpatient sample analysis.
Cureus. 2023;15(10):n.p.
96. Wollin KM, Damm G, Foth H, Freyberger A, Gebel T,
Mangerich A, et al Critical evaluation of human health
risks due to hydraulic fracturing in natural gas and
petroleum production. Archives of Toxicology.
2020;94:967–1016.
97. Wood MH, Fabbri L. Challenges and opportunities for
assessing global progress in reducing chemical accident
risks. Progress in Disaster Science. 2019;4:100044.
98. Xiao J, Xu X, Wang F, Ma J, Liao M, Shi Y, et al
Analysis of exposure to pesticide residues from
traditional Chinese medicine. Journal of Hazardous
Materials. 2019;365:857–67.
99. Xiong K, Kukec A, Rumrich IK, Rejc T, Pasetto R,
Iavarone I, et al Methods of health risk and impact
assessment at industrially contaminated sites: A
systematic review. 2018.
100. Yang S, Sun L, Sun Y, Song K, Qin Q, Zhu Z, et al
Towards an integrated health risk assessment framework
of soil heavy metals pollution: Theoretical basis,
conceptual model, and perspectives. Environmental
Pollution. 2023;316:120596.
101. Zanke P. Exploring the role of AI and ML in workers'
compensation risk management. Human-Computer
Interaction Perspectives. 2022;2(1):24–44.
102. Zurub HH. The effectiveness of the occupational health
and safety management system in the United Arab
Emirates [dissertation]. Aston University; 2021.
