Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24328919›Full record

ReviewWorkplace health & safety2013

Occupational chemical exposures among cosmetologists: risk of reproductive disorders.

Victoria M Pak, Martha Powers, Jianghong Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Workplace health & safety, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Reproductive disorders among cosmetologists and hairdressers: a meta-analysis.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Victoria M Pak
Martha Powers
Jianghong Liu

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM/RESPIRATORY NEUROBIOLOGY AND SLEEPT32HL007713 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI PACK, ALLAN I · 1992 to 2022
$11.9M
Mechanisms that mediate the link between lead exposure and child behavior problemK02ES019878 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI LIU, JIANGHONG · 2011 to 2015
$656k
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007713NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL07713NIEHS NIH HHS K02 ES019878NIEHS NIH HHS K02-ES019878
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

More research is needed to understand possible occupational reproductive risks for cosmetologists, specifically hairdressers and nail technicians, two occupations that often share workspace and exposure to hair dyes and nail polish. Cosmetologists are predominantly females of reproductive age; thus, they may be at higher risk for the effects of exposure to reproductive toxins. The purpose of this article is to inform nurses and public health professionals about occupational exposures for cosmetologists and discuss interventions to reduce the risks of reproductive disorders among susceptible worker populations.

Indexed as

Abnormalities, Drug-InducedAbortion, SpontaneousCosmeticsCosmetic TechniquesFemaleHair PreparationsHazardous SubstancesHumansInfertility, FemaleMenstruation DisturbancesOccupational DiseasesOccupational ExposurePregnancyPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsRisk FactorsCosmeticsHair PreparationsHazardous Substances

Identifiers

PMID24328919
PMCPMC4260452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.