ReviewCurrent environmental health reports2016
Recent Scientific Evidence Regarding Asbestos Use and Health Consequences of Asbestos Exposure.
Review in Current environmental health reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of Nationwide Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk Evaluation Methods with Comprehensive Past Asbestos Exposure Reconstruction.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Prevention of Asbestos Exposure in Latin America within a Global Public Health Perspective.Annals of global health · 2019Review
- Relationships of Lower Lung Fibrosis, Pleural Disease, and Lung Mass with Occupational, Household, Neighborhood, and Slate Roof-Dense Area Residential Asbestos Exposure.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Evidence Regarding the Impact of Conflicts of Interest on Environmental and Occupational Health Research.Current environmental health reports · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To justify the continuous use of two million tons of asbestos every year, it has been argued that a safe/controlled use can be achieved. The aim of this review was to identify recent scientific studies that present empirical evidence of: 1) health consequences resulting from past asbestos exposures and 2) current asbestos exposures resulting from asbestos use. Articles with evidence that could support or reject the safe/controlled use argument were also identified. A total of 155 articles were included in the review, and 87 % showed adverse asbestos health consequences or high asbestos exposures. Regarding the safe/controlled use, 44 articles were identified, and 82 % had evidence suggesting that the safe/controlled use is not being achieved. A large percentage of articles with evidence that support the safe/controlled use argument have a conflict of interest declared. Most of the evidence was developed in high-income countries and in countries that have already banned asbestos.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27696225What 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.