ArticleBritish journal of cancer2012
Occupational cancer in Britain. Statistical methodology.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Burden of cancer attributable to six occupational exposures in the Netherlands, 2021: a health impact assessment study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Occupational Exposure to Wood Dust and the Burden of Nasopharynx and Sinonasal Cancer in Canada.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Lifetime occupational exposure proportion estimation methods: a sensitivity analysis in the general population.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2021Article
- An innovative method to estimate lifetime prevalence of carcinogenic occupational circumstances: the example of painters and workers of the rubber manufacturing industry in France.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2021Article
- Global and regional burden of cancer in 2016 arising from occupational exposure to selected carcinogens: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2020Article
- Occupational cancer claims in Korea from 2010 to 2016.Annals of occupational and environmental medicine · 2018Article
- The Global Burden of Occupational Disease.Current environmental health reports · 2017Review
- Prioritising action on occupational carcinogens in Europe: a socioeconomic and health impact assessment.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- The burden of occupationally-related cutaneous malignant melanoma in Britain due to solar radiation.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- But other than mesothelioma? An estimate of the proportion of work-related cancers in Quebec.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2016Article
- The proportion of cancer attributable to occupational exposures.Annals of epidemiology · 2015Review
- A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010.Lancet (London, England) · 2012 · on this mapArticle
- Ionising radiation and occupational cancer in Britain.British journal of cancer · 2012Article
- Occupational cancer burden in Great Britain.British journal of cancer · 2012Article
- Occupational cancer in Britain. Industry sector results.British journal of cancer · 2012Article
- Occupational cancer in Britain. Exposure assessment methodology.British journal of cancer · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An approach using the attributable fraction (AF) has been developed to estimate the current burden of occupational cancer in Britain. The AF combines the relative risk (RR) associated with exposure with the proportion exposed. For each cancer-exposure pairing, the RR is selected from key epidemiological literature such as an industry, or population-based study, meta-analysis or review. The CARcinogen EXposure (CAREX) database provides point estimates for the number of workers exposed to a range of carcinogens; alternative sources are national surveys such as the Labour Force Survey and Census of Employment. The number of workers exposed are split between high and low exposure levels matched to appropriate RRs from the literature. The relevant period for cancer development during which exposure occurred is defined as the risk exposure period (REP). Estimation of the numbers ever exposed over the REP takes into account the changes in the number of people employed in primary and manufacturing industry and service sectors in Britain where appropriate, and adjustment is made for staff turnover over the period and for life expectancy. National estimates of the population ever of working age during the REP are used for the proportion denominator. Strategies have been developed to combine exposure AFs correctly while avoiding double counting and minimising bias. The AFs are applied to national cancer deaths and registrations to obtain occupation-attributable cancer numbers. The methods are adaptable for other diseases and other geographies, and are also adaptable to more sophisticated modelling if better exposure and dose-response data are available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.