Objectives: This study examined whether management-level discussions on Health and Productivity Management (HPM) and the involvement of occupational health professionals in discussions are associated with workplace health promotion (WHP) program outcomes, as indicated by HPM evaluation.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using data from 2495 corporations that submitted the 2020 HPM Survey Sheets. Corporations were categorized into 3 groups based on the presence or absence of HPM discussions at management-level meetings and the attendance of occupational health professionals. The overall score and the deviation score for “assessment and improvement” were used as indicators of program outcomes. Multiple regression analyses were performed, adjusting for industry sector, company size, and number of occupational physicians and occupational health nurses.

Results: Corporations without HPM discussions at management-level meetings showed significantly lower scores on both indicators (overall score coefficient: −11.70; 95% CI, −12.83 to −10.53; “assessment and improvement” coefficient: −11.30; 95% CI, −12.50 to −9.97). In contrast, corporations with HPM discussions attended by occupational health professionals demonstrated significantly higher scores than those without such attendance (overall score coefficient: 5.39; 95% CI, 4.61-6.18; “assessment and improvement” coefficient: 5.15; 95% CI, 4.28-6.02). These associations remained significant after adjusting for covariates.

Conclusions: The findings indicate that discussions about HPM at management-level meetings and the involvement of occupational health professionals are associated with WHP program outcomes. These results suggest that collaboration between top management and occupational health professionals in management reviews may contribute to the successful implementation of WHP programs.

Objectives: Strengthening the research workforce is essential to safeguard public health and human lives. This study examined the associations between work hours and perceived performance appraisal, and the intention to leave the medical research workforce.

Methods: This cross-sectional study used data collected from medical researchers between December 2022 and January 2023. The questionnaire was distributed to participants via all 141 societies of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences. Weekly work hours were self-reported using 10 response options. Perceived appraisal of research performance at work was assessed using 6 response options and dichotomized into inappropriately appraised (slightly disagree/totally disagree) and the rest. Intention to leave the research workforce was also self-reported and dichotomized. We calculated multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for intention to leave, according to work hours and perceived appraisal.

Results: Of 3139 participants (852 women), most (n = 686) worked 60-79 hours weekly. One in four (n = 745) felt inappropriately appraised, and 11% (n = 356) intended to leave. A U-shaped association was observed between work hours and intention to leave (aOR: 2.05; 95% CI, 1.12-3.73, for weekly working 100 hours or longer), although the quadratic trend was not significant (P = .15). The inappropriately appraised group had a 3.6 times (95% CI, 2.81-4.58) higher OR of intending to leave compared with their appropriately appraised counterparts.

Conclusions: The results suggest that researchers who work long hours and feel inappropriately appraised are more likely to consider leaving the medical research workforce.