ArticleBMJ open2020
Sarcoidosis and silica dust exposure among men in Sweden: a case-control study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occupational exposure to toxic particles and risk of pulmonary sarcoidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Pooled it
- Occupational exposures and sarcoidosis: a rapid review of the evidence.Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Particles exposures and sarcoidosis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2025Article
- Silicosarcoidosis: Histologic and Clinical Features of an Occupational Granulomatous Disease.American journal of industrial medicine · 2025Article
- A review of silicosis and other silica-related diseases in the engineered stone countertop processing industry.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Phenotypes and Endotypes in Sarcoidosis: Unraveling Prognosis and Disease Course.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- A framework for exclusion of alternative diagnoses in sarcoidosis.Journal of autoimmunity · 2024Review
- Sarcoidosis: a general overview.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2024Review
- Occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica and incident idiopathic interstitial pneumonias and pulmonary sarcoidosis: a national prospective follow-up study.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2024Article
- Contributions of Synthetic Chemicals to Autoimmune Disease Development and Occurrence.Current environmental health reports · 2024Review
- Elevated Levels of the Cancer Marker Neuron-Specific Enolase in a Patient With Coexisting Silicosis and Sarcoidosis.Cureus · 2024Article
- Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis Development.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2023Review
- Review
- Understanding the pathogenesis of occupational coal and silica dust-associated lung disease.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022Review
- Time trends in occupational exposure to chemicals in Sweden: proportion exposed, distribution across demographic and labor market strata, and exposure levels.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2022Article
- The Relationship between Tumor Development and Sarcoidosis in Aspects of Carcinogenesis before and after the Onset of Sarcoidosis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Sarcoidosis in Northern Ontario hard-rock miners: A case series.American journal of industrial medicine · 2022Article
- Sarcoidosis: An Occupational Disease?Chest · 2021Review
- Relationship between Occupational Exposure to Airborne Nanoparticles, Nanoparticle Lung Burden and Lung Diseases.Toxics · 2021Article
- Associations between occupational and environmental exposures and organ involvement in sarcoidosis: a retrospective case-case analysis.Respiratory research · 2021Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether occupational exposure to silica dust is associated with an increased risk of developing sarcoidosis.
designCase-control study of all individuals between 20 and 65 years of age diagnosed with sarcoidosis (D86) in Sweden between 2007 and 2016. Controls were matched to cases (2:1) based on age, sex and county at the time of diagnosis. A Job Exposure Matrix was used to estimate the occupational silica exposure of all cases and controls.
settingMedical and occupational data from the National Outpatient Register were used to implement a case-control analysis, while the two controls used for each case were selected from the National Register of the Total Population. Information about occupation and time of employment were collected from the Swedish Occupational Register.
participantsAll men and women aged 20-65 years old who were diagnosed sarcoidosis (D86) from 2007 to 2016 were included and assigned two controls. MAIN OUTCOMES: Silica dust exposure correlates with an increased risk of developing sarcoidosis in men.
resultsThe prevalence of silica exposure at work was statistically significantly higher among male cases than controls (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.43). For men of an age of 35 years or younger the correlation seems to be stronger (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.87) than in older men (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.39). For men older than 35 with exposure to silica the prevalence of sarcoidosis increased with the exposure time, with an OR of 1.44 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.00) for exposure of more than 10 years.
conclusionsOccupational exposure to silica dust seems to increase the risk of sarcoidosis among men between 20 and 65 years of age. The risk is higher among exposed men 35 years or younger and older men with longer exposure (>6 years).
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.