Applied Evidence

Assessing integrative prevention at work: A scoping review.

Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2026 · Systematic Review · PT · OT

Andrée-Anne Drolet, Alexandra Lecours, Lily Bellehumeur-Béchamp

PMID 41186568

Twelve workplace prevention tools were found, but none assesses all five attributes of integrative prevention on one scale.

Most lack published validity or reliability data, and only a few have any such evidence.

Key findings

112 assessment tools were identified from 13 manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria.

2Communication among stakeholders and collaboration among stakeholders were the most frequently assessed attributes (n = 10 each), followed by holistic vision of health (n = 8).

3No current tool assesses all five attributes of integrative prevention on the same scale.

Still to come

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs


Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The quality of the 13 included manuscripts was not assessed, so the review does not judge how robust the evidence behind each tool is. Most of the 12 tools have no published validity or reliability data; only a minority report any psychometric properties. No tool assesses all five attributes of integrative prevention on a unified scale, so no single instrument gives a complete picture. Some tools were developed more than a decade ago and may not reflect the current conceptualization of integrative prevention. Only French and English documents were included, which may exclude relevant tools developed in other languages. The field is described as emerging and sparsely documented, so the 13 manuscripts likely represent a small and still-growing body of work.

Declared interests

The work was supported by the first author's master's scholarship from the Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et sécurité du travail. The authors declared no other conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the existence of 12 assessment tools as evidence that integrative prevention at work is effective. This is a catalog of tools, not a test of them, and most lack published validity or reliability data. The review describes what is available; it does not show that any of these tools improves worker outcomes.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →