ArticleSpatial and spatio-temporal epidemiology2020
Using residential histories in case-control analysis of lung cancer and mountaintop removal coal mining in Central Appalachia.
Article in Spatial and spatio-temporal epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of LexisNexis-derived retrospective address histories in the Sister Study cohort.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026Article
- Predictors of LexisNexis residential history availability and registry data concordance for childhood cancer research.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Influence of Individual- and Area-Level Social Determinants of Health on Likelihood of Living Versus Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Individual-level social determinants of health and disparities in access to kidney transplant and waitlist mortality.PloS one · 2024Article
- Maternal proximity to mountain-top removal mining and birth defects in Appalachian Kentucky, 1997-2003.PloS one · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Population-based ecological and cross-sectional studies have observed high risk for several cancers in areas of Central Appalachia where mountaintop removal coal mines operate. Case-control studies could provide stronger evidence of such relationships, but misclassification of exposure is likely when based on current residence, since individuals could have inhabited several residences with varying environmental exposures over many years. To address this, we used residential histories for individuals enrolled in a previous case-control study of lung cancer to assess residential proximity to mountaintop removal coal mining over a 30-year period, using both survey data and proprietary data from LexisNexis, Inc. Supplementing the survey data with LexisNexis data improved precision and completeness of geographic coordinates. Final logistic regression models revealed higher odds of high exposure among cases. These findings suggest that living in close proximity to mountaintop removal coal mining sites could increase risk for lung cancer, after adjusting for other relevant factors.
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.