Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26395169›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Lung cancer risk among workers in the construction industry: results from two case-control studies in Montreal.

Aude Lacourt, Javier Pintos, Jérôme Lavoué, Lesley Richardson, Jack Siemiatycki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Aude LacourtUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), 850 rue St-Denis, Montreal, Qc, H2X 0A9, Canada. aude.lacourt@isped.u-bordeaux2.fr.
Javier PintosUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), 850 rue St-Denis, Montreal, Qc, H2X 0A9, Canada. javier.pintos@crchum.qc.ca.
Jérôme LavouéUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), 850 rue St-Denis, Montreal, Qc, H2X 0A9, Canada. jerome.lavoue@umontreal.ca.
Lesley RichardsonUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), 850 rue St-Denis, Montreal, Qc, H2X 0A9, Canada. lesley.richardson@sympatico.ca.
Jack SiemiatyckiUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), 850 rue St-Denis, Montreal, Qc, H2X 0A9, Canada. j.siemiatycki@umontreal.ca.
Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CAInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer · CAMcGill University Health Centre · CAUniversité de Bordeaux · FRUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven the large number of workers in the construction industry, it is important to derive accurate and valid estimates of cancer risk, and in particular lung cancer risk. In most previous studies, risks among construction workers were compared with general populations including blue and white collar workers. The main objectives of this study were to assess whether construction workers experience excess lung cancer risk, and whether exposure to selected construction industry exposures carries excess risks. We wished to address these objectives within the sub-population of blue collar workers.

methodsTwo case-control studies were conducted in Montreal. Combined, they included 1593 lung cancer cases and 1427 controls, of whom 1304 cases and 1081 controls had been blue collar workers. Detailed lifetime job histories were obtained and translated by experts into histories of exposure to chemical agents. The two key analyses were to estimate odds ratio (OR) estimates of lung cancer risk: a) for all blue-collar construction workers compared with other blue-collar workers, and b) for construction workers exposed to each of 20 exposure agents found in the construction industry compared with construction workers unexposed to those agents. All analyses were conducted using unconditional logistic regression adjusted for socio-demographic factors and smoking history.

resultsThe OR for all construction workers combined was 1.11 (95 % CI: 0.90-1.38), based on 381 blue collar construction workers. Analyses of specific exposures were hampered by small numbers and imprecise estimates. While none of 20 occupational agents examined was significantly associated with lung cancer, the following agents manifested non-significantly elevated ORs: asbestos, silica, Portland cement, soil dust, calcium oxide and calcium sulfate.

conclusionsCompared with other blue collar workers, there was only a slight increased risk of lung cancer for subjects who ever held an occupation in the construction industry. The analyses of agents within the construction industry produced imprecise estimates of risk, but nevertheless pointed to some plausible associations. Excess risks for asbestos and silica were in line with previous knowledge. The possible excess risks with the other inorganic dusts require further corroboration.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsbestosCanadaCase-Control StudiesConstruction IndustryDustFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedOccupational DiseasesOccupational ExposureOdds RatioAsbestosDust

Identifiers

PMID26395169
PMCPMC4580354
OpenAlexW2101685056

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.