Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21030336›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2011

Utility of recent studies to assess the National Research Council 2001 estimates of cancer risk from ingested arsenic.

Herman Gibb, Cary Haver, David Gaylor, Santhini Ramasamy, Janice S Lee, Danelle Lobdell, Timothy Wade, Chao Chen, Paul White, Reeder Sams

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Lung Cancer Risk and Inorganic Arsenic in Drinking Water.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Environmental source of arsenic exposure.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2014
    Article
  16. The global burden of disease for skin, lung, and bladder cancer caused by arsenic in food.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Low-dose arsenic: in search of a risk threshold.Environmental health perspectives · 2014
    Article
  19. Removal of arsenic species from water by batch and column operations on bagasse fly ash.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2014
    Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Herman GibbTetra Tech Sciences, Arlington, Virginia, USA. Herman.Gibb@tetratech.com
Cary Haver
David Gaylor
Santhini Ramasamy
Janice S Lee
Danelle Lobdell
Timothy Wade
Chao Chen
Paul White
Reeder Sams

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this review is to evaluate the impact of recent epidemiologic literature on the National Research Council (NRC) assessment of the lung and bladder cancer risks from ingesting low concentrations (< 100 µg/L) of arsenic-contaminated water. DATA SOURCES, EXTRACTION, AND SYNTHESIS: PubMed was searched for epidemiologic studies pertinent to the lung and bladder cancer risk estimates from low-dose arsenic exposure. Articles published from 2001, the date of the NRC assessment, through September 2010 were included. Fourteen epidemiologic studies on lung and bladder cancer risk were identified as potentially useful for the analysis.

conclusionsRecent epidemiologic studies that have investigated the risk of lung and bladder cancer from low arsenic exposure are limited in their ability to detect the NRC estimates of excess risk because of sample size and less than lifetime exposure. Although the ecologic nature of the Taiwanese studies on which the NRC estimates are based present certain limitations, the data from these studies have particular strengths in that they describe lung and bladder cancer risks resulting from lifetime exposure in a large population and remain the best data on which to conduct quantitative risk assessment. Continued follow-up of a population in northeastern Taiwan, however, offers the best opportunity to improve the cancer risk assessment for arsenic in drinking water. Future studies of arsenic < 100 µg/L in drinking water and lung and bladder cancer should consider adequacy of the sample size, the synergistic relationship of arsenic and smoking, duration of arsenic exposure, age when exposure began and ended, and histologic subtype.

Indexed as

National Academy of Sciences, U.S.ArsenicEnvironmental ExposureEpidemiologic StudiesHumansLung NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentUnited StatesUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsWater Pollutants, ChemicalArsenicWater Pollutants, Chemical

Identifiers

PMID21030336
PMCPMC3059988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.