ReviewJournal of occupational health2019
Update of occupational lung disease.
Review in Journal of occupational health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in quantitative chest imaging analysis for occupational lung disease: appraisal of its current status.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Early Identification, Accurate Diagnosis, and Treatment of Silicosis.Canadian respiratory journal · 2022Review
- Biomonitorization of concentrations of 28 elements in serum and urine among workers exposed to indium compounds.PloS one · 2021Article
- Radiographic diagnosis of Pneumoconioses by AIR Pneumo-trained physicians: Comparison with low-dose thin-slice computed tomography.Journal of occupational health · 2020Article
- Progress in educational program for diagnosis of occupational respiratory disease in Japan -Activity of Asian Intensive Reader of Pneumoconioses (AIR Pneumo).Journal of occupational health · 2020Article
- Update of occupational lung disease.Journal of occupational health · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveOccupational Lung Disease is an oldest but still a biggest problem in occupational health.
methodsSteering Committee members of the Japan Society for Occupational Health (JSOH) Occupational Lung Disease Study Group selected and summarized current topics on occupational lung diseases based on expert opinion, as informed by governmental regulation, public health concerns, and frequently discussed in related academic conferences.
resultsThe topics included in this review are professional education in medical screening skills, 2014 update of Helsinki Criteria, respiratory diseases found in the earthquake and tsunami affected regions, newly recognized occupational lung diseases, and potential respiratory health hazards. DISCUSSIONS: Although occupational lung diseases seem to stay as one of the major concerns in occupational health, screening tools and control measures are standardized for the better prevention of the diseases. As this health problem usually occurs in where the most actively economically developing area is, the patients tend to increase in emerging economic powers with huge population.
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.