Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract We will address the difficulty of defining occupational diseases (OD), a definition that necessarily arises from consensus among governments or regulators, employers' representatives, and employees' representatives. Starting from the conventions and recommendations of international bodies, we will review a benchmark of existing definitions of occupational diseases in different markets. Having a list of OD established by law is a solution to the issue of a generic definition. However, this system is not without its challenges. The diversity of professions and exposures makes it difficult to create exhaustive lists. The lists are not uniform across countries. It is often very difficult, if not impossible, to prove that a disease is directly attributable to the victim's profession. The question of revising the lists remains open. We will review models and approaches aimed at addressing the issue of the cause-and-effect relationship characterizing occupational diseases: prevention, surveillance, long-term monitoring, these models can vary depending on jurisdiction, available resources, and the complexity of occupational exposures. Each model aims to strengthen the correlation between workplace exposure and OD while adapting to the specificities of each national context. In summary, defining OD and how to manage them poses significant challenges that requires in-depth consideration and international cooperation. Establishing specific lists and exploring various models are crucial steps in protecting workers' health and ensuring adequate recognition of occupational diseases in the ever-evolving world of work.
Mohamed Belbaraka (Mon,) studied this question.