Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Study framework and participants.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Occupational hazard factors and OHS efforts questionnaire items (number of questions).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

OHSMS standard structuring.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 2.

Characteristics of the study participants.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Occupational hazard level in four workplace types.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 3.

Detailed occupational hazard factors perceived by members of the four different work types in the ROKN workplaces.

(A) Biochemicals, (B) Physical burden, (C) Mechanical and electric, and (D) Work environment. Data were presented as the percentage of moderate or high-hazard levels (≥3 points) for each component.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

Comparison of OHS efforts between workplaces to which OHSMS applied and unapplied in military engineering and ordnance ammunition types.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Comparison of OHS efforts by operating period (2–5 years) according to the time of OHSMS application (2017–2020) in repair and maintenance type.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Adjustment importance weights and priorities of OHSMS components through AHP-entropy analysis.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 4.

The IPA matrix.

The average of X-axis (performance) is 4.495, and the average of Y-axis (importance) is 0.045.

More »

Fig 4 Expand