ArticleInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2021
Chronic productive cough and inhalant occupational exposure-a study of the general population.
Article in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2021. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occupational exposure to vapor, gas, dust and fume using job-exposure matrix in a population-based, nationwide study in Kazakhstan.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Associations Between Occupational Exposures and Cough Subclasses Among Middle-Aged Australians.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Article
- Occupational exposure and chronic bronchitis in a sample of the general population in Telemark, Norway: a two-phased cross-sectional study.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2025Article
- A register-based study: cough - a frequent phenomenon in the adult population.BMC pulmonary medicine · 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
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOccupational inhalant exposures have been linked with a higher occurrence of chronic productive cough, but recent studies question the association.
methodsWe included participants from two general population studies, the Copenhagen City General Population Study and the Copenhagen City Heart Study, to assess contemporary (year 2003-2017) and historical (1976-1983) occupational inhalant hazards. Job titles one year prior to study inclusion and an airborne chemical job-exposure matrix (ACE JEM) were used to estimate occupational exposure. The association between occupational exposures and self-reported chronic productive cough was studied using generalized estimating equations stratified by smoking status and cohort.
resultsThe population consisted of 5210 working individuals aged 20-65 from 1976 to 1983 and 64,279 from 2003 to 2017. In smokers, exposure to high levels of mineral dust, biological dust, gases & fumes and the composite variable vapours, gases, dusts or fumes (VGDF) were associated with chronic productive cough in both cohorts with odds ratios in the range of 1.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.0;1.4) to 1.6 (1.2;2.1). High levels of biological dust were only associated with an increased risk of a chronic productive cough in the 2003-2017 cohort (OR 1.5 (1.1;2.0)). In non-smokers, high levels of VGDF (OR 1.5 (1.0;2.3)) and low levels of mineral dust (OR 1.7 (1.1;2.4)) were associated with chronic productive cough in the 1976-1983 cohort, while no associations were seen in non-smokers in the 2003-2017 cohort.
conclusionOccupational inhalant exposure remains associated with a modestly increased risk of a chronic productive cough in smokers, despite declining exposure levels during the past four decades.
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.