ArticleAnnals of occupational and environmental medicine2021
Distribution of Lung-RADS categories according to job type in a single shipyard workers.
Article in Annals of occupational and environmental medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lung cancer screening in occupational settings: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based graded training of pulmonary nodules for junior radiology residents and medical imaging students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently, lung cancer screenings based on age and smoking history using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) have begun in Korea. This study aimed to evaluate the distribution of lung imaging reporting and data system (Lung-RADS) categories in shipyard workers exposed to lung carcinogens such as nickel, chromium, and welding fumes according to job type, to provide basic data regarding indications for LDCT in shipyard workers.
methodsThis study included 6,326 workers from a single shipyard, who underwent health examinations with LDCT between January 2010 and December 2018. Data on age, smoking status and history, medical history, and job type were investigated. The participants were categorized into high-exposure, low-exposure, and non-exposure job groups based on the estimated exposure level of nickel, chromium, and welding fumes according to job type. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to determine the difference between exposure groups in Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 (3, 4A, and 4B).
resultsOut of all participants, 97 (1.5%) participants were classified into Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 and 7 (0.1%) participants were confirmed as lung cancer. The positive predictive value (ratio of diagnosed lung cancer cases to Lung-RADS category ≥ 3) was 7.2%. The hazard ratio (HR) of Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 was 1.451 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.911-2.309) in low-exposure and 1.692 (95% CI: 1.007-2.843) in high-exposure job group. Adjusting for age and pack-years, the HR was statistically significant only in the high-exposure job group (HR: 1.689; 95% CI: 1.004-2.841).
conclusionsBased on LDCT and Lung-RADS, among male shipyard workers, Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 were significantly higher in the high-exposure job group. Their HR tended to be > 1.0 and was statistically significant in the high-exposure job group. Additional studies should be conducted to establish more elaborate LDCT indications for occupational health examination.
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.