ReviewToxics2023
Determinants of Pesticide Exposure in Occupational Studies: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Toxics, 2023. 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.
- Multidimensional characterization of heterogeneity in pesticide co-exposure patterns.Frontiers in chemistry · 2026Article
- Leveraging Administrative Health Databases to Address Health Challenges in Farming Populations: Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis (1975-2024).JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Investigating Parkinson's disease risk across farming activities using data mining and large-scale administrative health data.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- Validation of a novel questionnaire for assessing occupational exposure to organophosphate pesticides in Chilean agricultural workers.Frontiers in toxicology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Few epidemiological studies use exposure determinants specifically tailored to assess pesticide or plant protection product (PPP) exposures when assessing presumed association between occupational exposure and health outcomes among agricultural workers. This lack of exposure specificity could lead to results that fail to detect an association. It could be related to the lack of consensus on exposure assessment methods and the choice of exposure determinants. We conducted a meta-analysis following the PRISMA checklist to identify PPP exposure determinants used in occupational studies and identified exposure determinants that best characterized agricultural exposures to PPPs. Out of 1436 studies identified, 71 were included. The exposure determinants identified were active ingredients, chemical classes, types of PPP, crops, tasks, frequencies, duration, lifetime exposure days, and intensity-weighted exposure days. Only six over 17 associations between exposure determinants and health outcomes were found with moderate quality of evidence. Overall, epidemiological studies had difficulty defining relevant determinants to characterize PPP exposures for agricultural workers. We recommend that a standardized list of determinants for PPP exposures in occupational exposure studies should include information on formulations, intensity, duration, and frequency of PPP exposure. Harmonized data collection on exposure and health outcomes are required as well as standard units for each exposure determinant.
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.