ArticleScandinavian journal of work, environment & health2016
Occupational risk factors for endometriosis in a cohort of flight attendants.
Article in Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aircrew Health: A Systematic Review of Physical Agents as Occupational Risk Factors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- From Environmental to Possible Occupational Exposure to Risk Factors: What Role Do They Play in the Etiology of Endometriosis?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- The Circadian-Light-Hygiene Hypothesis: A Potential Modulator of Fertility and Birthrate Trends.Biology · 2026Review
- Endometriosis: Challenges in Clinical Molecular Diagnostics and Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Incidence and Prevalence of Endometriosis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to (i) compare odds of endometriosis in a cohort of flight attendants against a comparison group of teachers and (ii) investigate occupational risk factors for endometriosis among flight attendants.
methodsWe included 1945 flight attendants and 236 teachers aged 18-45 years. Laparoscopically confirmed endometriosis was self-reported via telephone interview, and flight records were retrieved from airlines to obtain work schedules and assess exposures for flight attendants. We used proportional odds regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR adj) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for associations between exposures and endometriosis, adjusting for potential confounders.
resultsFlight attendants and teachers were equally likely to report endometriosis (OR adj1.0, 95% CI 0.5-2.2). Among flight attendants, there were no clear trends between estimated cosmic radiation, circadian disruption, or ergonomic exposures and endometriosis. Greater number of flight segments (non-stop flights between two cities) per year was associated with endometriosis (OR adj2.2, 1.1-4.2 for highest versus lowest quartile, P trend= 0.02) but block hours (taxi plus flight time) per year was not (OR adj1.2, 95% CI 0.6-2.2 for highest versus lowest quartile, P trend=0.38).
conclusionFlight attendants were no more likely than teachers to report endometriosis. Odds of endometriosis increased with number of flight segments flown per year. This suggests that some aspect of work scheduling is associated with increased risk of endometriosis, or endometriosis symptoms might affect how flight attendants schedule their flights.
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.