ReviewThe Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy
Review in The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nurses' internal contamination by antineoplastic drugs in hospital centers: a cross-sectional descriptive study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2021Observational
- Article
- Field evaluation of onsite near real-time monitors for surface contamination by 5-fluorouracil.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing evidence that traces of hazardous drugs occur in the urine of health care professionals who are exposed to these drugs.
objectiveTo review the scientific literature regarding urinary monitoring of health care professionals exposed to antineoplastic drugs through their work. DATA SOURCES: A search of PubMed using the Medical Subject Headings 'occupational exposure' and 'antineoplastic agents' and of Google Scholar using the terms 'antineoplastic', 'urine', and 'occupational exposure'. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: The analysis covered all articles in English or French pertaining to health care professionals exposed to hazardous drugs in the workplace, published from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2015. Articles that did not discuss the results of urine tests and those concerning veterinarians, as well as literature reviews, editorials, letters to the editor, and conference abstracts, were excluded. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-four articles were retained. The studies were conducted in 52 health care institutions in 7 countries. They included 826 workers exposed to hazardous drugs and 175 controls, specifically nurses (
conclusionTwenty-four studies on urine monitoring were conducted in 7 countries between 2010 and 2015. In several studies, no traces of drugs were detected in urine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27826155PMC5085322W2543112408What 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.