Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20424618›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2010

Occupation and cancer in Britain.

L Rushton, S Bagga, R Bevan, T P Brown, J W Cherrie, P Holmes, L Fortunato, R Slack, M Van Tongeren, C Young and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
17.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 260 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Methodological and Practical Challenges in Synthesizing Occupational Cancer Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Lung cancer mortality attributable to residential radon: a systematic scoping review.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

L RushtonDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London W2 1PG, UK. l.rushton@imperial.ac.uk
S Bagga
R Bevan
T P Brown
J W Cherrie
P Holmes
L Fortunato
R Slack
M Van Tongeren
C Young
S J Hutchings
Cranfield University · GBHealth & Safety Laboratory · GBImperial College London · GBInstitute of Occupational Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrioritising control measures for occupationally related cancers should be evidence based. We estimated the current burden of cancer in Britain attributable to past occupational exposures for International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) group 1 (established) and 2A (probable) carcinogens.

methodsWe calculated attributable fractions and numbers for cancer mortality and incidence using risk estimates from the literature and national data sources to estimate proportions exposed.

results5.3% (8019) cancer deaths were attributable to occupation in 2005 (men, 8.2% (6362); women, 2.3% (1657)). Attributable incidence estimates are 13 679 (4.0%) cancer registrations (men, 10 063 (5.7%); women, 3616 (2.2%)). Occupational attributable fractions are over 2% for mesothelioma, sinonasal, lung, nasopharynx, breast, non-melanoma skin cancer, bladder, oesophagus, soft tissue sarcoma, larynx and stomach cancers. Asbestos, shift work, mineral oils, solar radiation, silica, diesel engine exhaust, coal tars and pitches, occupation as a painter or welder, dioxins, environmental tobacco smoke, radon, tetrachloroethylene, arsenic and strong inorganic mists each contribute 100 or more registrations. Industries and occupations with high cancer registrations include construction, metal working, personal and household services, mining, land transport, printing/publishing, retail/hotels/restaurants, public administration/defence, farming and several manufacturing sectors. 56% of cancer registrations in men are attributable to work in the construction industry (mainly mesotheliomas, lung, stomach, bladder and non-melanoma skin cancers) and 54% of cancer registrations in women are attributable to shift work (breast cancer).

conclusionThis project is the first to quantify in detail the burden of cancer and mortality due to occupation specifically for Britain. It highlights the impact of occupational exposures, together with the occupational circumstances and industrial areas where exposures to carcinogenic agents occurred in the past, on population cancer morbidity and mortality; this can be compared with the impact of other causes of cancer. Risk reduction strategies should focus on those workplaces where such exposures are still occurring.

Indexed as

Agricultural Workers' DiseasesAsbestosCarcinogensCoal TarFemaleHumansIncidenceIndustryMaleMesotheliomaNeoplasmsOccupational DiseasesOccupational ExposureOccupationsUnited KingdomAsbestosCarcinogensCoal Tar

Identifiers

PMID20424618
PMCPMC2865752
OpenAlexW1979494290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.