ArticleJournal of research in health sciences2016
Restrictive Pattern of Pulmonary Symptoms among Photocopy and Printing Workers: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of research in health sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term occupational exposure to volatile organic compounds and progressive pulmonary function decline: a 5-year cohort study in the printing industry.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Potential association of bilateral macular edema with retinal vein occlusion triggered by volatile organic compounds of paint: A case report.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2025Article
- Estimation of indoor air pollutant during photocopy/printing operation: a computational fluid dynamics (CFD)-based study.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2020Article
- Effects of toner-handling work on respiratory function, chest X-ray findings, and biomarkers of inflammation, allergy, and oxidative stress: a 10-year prospective Japanese cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2020Article
- Pilot deep RNA sequencing of worker blood samples from Singapore printing industry for occupational risk assessment.NanoImpact · 2020Article
- Safe use of chemicals by professional users and health care specialists.Biomedical reports · 2018Article
- Synergistic effects of engineered nanoparticles and organics released from laser printers using nano-enabled toners: potential health implications from exposures to the emitted organic aerosol.Environmental science. Nano · 2017Article
- Nanoparticle exposures from nano-enabled toner-based printing equipment and human health: state of science and future research needs.Critical reviews in toxicology · 2017Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to the growth of photocopier usage in workplaces, the potential risk of occupational exposure to the airborne chemicals has been raised up. Hence, monitoring the photocopy worker's respiratory functions seems to be necessary. We aimed to evaluate the respiratory health on photocopy and printing workers so that a reliable description can be made about their occupational hygiene.
methodsThis study was performed in Shiraz, southwest Iran in 2014 and a group of 150 photocopy and printing workers were surveyed as exposed group in addition to a group of 114 office staff as unexposed group. The respiratory standard questionnaire was used to evaluate the prevalence of respiratory symptoms among the selected staff. Pulmonary function indexes including VC, FVC, FEV1 and the FEV1/FVC ratio were calculated. Finally, t-test, Chi Square and multiple logistic regressions were conducted.
resultsVC, FVC and FEV1 in photocopy and printing workers were lower than the unexposed group of which these differences for FVC and FEV1 were statistically significant (P<0.05). Moreover, the prevalence of all respiratory symptoms, except the shortness of breath, in exposed group was more than the unexposed group and the prevalence of coughing and wheezing was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was a significant difference in respiratory symptoms (cough and wheezing) between two groups after controlling for confounding variables, OR: 2.61 (95% CI: 1.21, 5.62) and 2.92 (95% CI: 1.25, 6.84), respectively.
conclusionsThe prevalence of excess respiratory symptoms along with pattern of pulmonary restrictive sings in photocopy and printing workers revealed that the workplace conditions can result in occupational respiratory diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27497775PMC7189934W2341736507What 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.