ArticleSafety and health at work2022
Epidemiology of Urolithiasis with Sex and Working Status Stratification Based on the National Representative Cohort in Republic of Korea.
Article in Safety and health at work, 2022. 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.
- A qualitative exploration of occupational influences on hydration, urination habits, food patterns, and self-care among patients with urolithiasis.BMC nephrology · 2026Observational
- Epidemiological trends of urolithiasis in working-age populations: Findings from the global burden of disease study 1990-2021.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to estimate the annual prevalence and incidence of urolithiasis stratified by work status based on a large nationwide sample. Methods: This study used data from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort from 2002 to 2015. The prevalence and incidence of urolithiasis were estimated based on work status and gender stratification. The risk of urolithiasis among workers was calculated using age-standardized incidence ratio with stratification of work type. Results: The prevalence of urolithiasis was significantly higher in workers than in non-workers, especially men, during the follow-up period. The total estimated number of urolithiasis cases was 41,086 and the overall incidence of urolithiasis was 0.3%. The age-standardized incidence ratio of urolithiasis was significantly higher among the total workers (1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.16), self-employed workers (1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.11), and paid workers (1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.21) than among the non-working population. Conclusions: Workers, especially paid workers and men, were vulnerable to urolithiasis. Further studies are required to investigate the effects of working conditions on urolithiasis.
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.