JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Work-related psychosocial hazards are increasingly recognised as modifiable determinants of mental health and wellbeing. In Great Britain, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Management Standards identify six areas of work design associated with work-related stress: Demands, Control, Support, Relationships, Role and Change. Construction presents a distinctive surveillance challenge because work is often temporary, project-based, commercially pressured and delivered through fragmented supply chains. It remains unclear whether existing generic psychosocial risk assessment frameworks capture the hazards that need to be monitored in UK and Republic of Ireland construction.

Objective:

To identify work-related psychosocial hazards reported in peer-reviewed studies of construction workers in the UK and Republic of Ireland, map them against the HSE Management Standards, and assess their implications for construction-specific psychosocial risk identification and assessment.

Methods:

This rapid scoping review followed a published protocol and was reported in line with PRISMA-ScR, with adaptations for rapid review methodology. Web of Science, PsycINFO and MEDLINE were searched for English-language peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2025. Eligible studies included UK or Republic of Ireland construction workers and reported work-related psychosocial risk factors linked to mental health or wellbeing. Data were extracted on study characteristics, participant demographics, psychosocial hazards and equity-related variables. Hazards were mapped to HSE Management Standards domains and assessed as captured, partially captured or not captured by HSE Stress Indicator Tool wording. Hazards that did not fit a single domain were synthesised thematically with hazards not captured by the tool to identify surveillance-relevant gaps.

Results:

Twelve studies were included: seven qualitative, two quantitative and three mixed-methods studies. Samples were predominantly male, and reporting of equity-related characteristics was limited, particularly for ethnicity, migrant status and employment type. Approximately 90 coded hazard entries were mapped across the six HSE domains. Around 28 aligned clearly with Stress Indicator Tool wording, including long hours, high workload, time pressure, limited decision authority, poor support, interpersonal conflict, role conflict and poor communication around change. However, approximately 60 hazards were not captured and two were partially captured. A further 22 hazards could not be mapped to a single HSE domain. These unmapped and not-captured hazards clustered into three surveillance-relevant categories: project-based commercial, programme, planning and delivery pressures; fragmented workforce structure, supply-chain position, financial insecurity and unequal access to protection; and delivery-first culture, weak worker voice and constrained recovery or help-seeking.

Conclusions:

The HSE Management Standards provide a useful foundation for psychosocial risk assessment in UK and Republic of Ireland construction, but they do not fully capture hazards generated by construction’s project-based commercial model, fragmented employment arrangements and delivery-first culture. Construction-specific surveillance and risk assessment should retain the HSE domains while adding indicators of upstream procurement, programme, planning, payment, employment and supply-chain conditions.