ArticleRevista de saude publica2018
Urinary cotinine in tobacco farmers in Southern Brazil.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2018. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impacts on the economy, health, and environment resulting from tobacco cultivation: A cross-sectional survey of tobacco farmer perspectives in Thailand.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Child Labor in Family Tobacco Farms in Southern Brazil: Occupational Exposure and Related Health Problems.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Association of passive smoking with dental caries and salivary biomarkers among 5-10 years old children of Muradnagar, Ghaziabad.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2019Article
- Global Burden of Green Tobacco Sickness in Farm Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence, Gender Disparities, and Socio-Economic Determinants.Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe urinary cotinine levels in tobacco farmers.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in 2,570 tobacco farmers. All participants that reported green tobacco sickness in the week prior to the interview plus a subsample of 492 pesticide applicators were included. We collected urinary samples and information about sociodemographic, behavioral, dietary, occupational characteristics, and pesticide poisoning during their lifetime. Stratification by sex and smoking was performed and the Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis non-parametrical tests were used to analyze cotinine means.
resultsThis study included 582 individuals. There was no difference in urinary cotinine means between green tobacco sickness symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Among non-smokers, having picked tobacco in the previous week was associated with higher cotinine means in both genders. Cotinine levels were higher on the first day of symptoms and reduced exponentially with each day in female non-smokers. Male non-smokers had higher levels on the second day and a more gradual reduction. The cotinine level rose up to 15 cigarettes/day of consumption.
conclusionsThe urinary cotinine measures exposure to nicotine up to its saturation point; while green tobacco sickness, affected by tolerance, indicates nicotine poisoning. Strategies to reduce nicotine exposure in tobacco production are needed. Mechanization could be an alternative, as long as it overcame the challenge of irregular terrain and did not affect the quality of the leaf. More studies are needed to evaluate the chronic effect of nicotine exposure.
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.