ReviewGlobal epidemiology2022
Systematic review of perchloroethylene and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Review in Global epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Occupational exposures and cancer risk in commercial laundry and dry cleaning industries: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2023Article
- The role of study quality in aspartame and cancer epidemiology study reviews.Global epidemiology · 2023Article
- Response: Alternative approaches for systematic review.Global epidemiology · 2022Article
- Commentary: On the reliability of causal claims.Global epidemiology · 2022Article
- Commentary: Systematic reviews and observational epidemiology: The more things change….Global epidemiology · 2022Article
- Commentary on Methodologic choices in synthesizing epidemiologic evidence to assess perchloroethylene and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Global epidemiology · 2022Article
- Commentary: Quantifying the impact of bias to inform quality assessments in systematic reviews: The case of perchloroethylene and Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Global epidemiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review of epidemiology studies that evaluated the association between perchloroethylene (PCE) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). This included an independent detailed assessment of a few critical aspects of study quality (i.e., study design, exposure measurement, exposure levels, and potential confounding), and a consideration of other aspects of quality less formally. Of the identified 18 cohort studies of 15 unique cohorts, 17 case-control studies of 14 unique population groups, and 3 ecological studies, none was high quality for all four critical quality elements and each study also had other major methodological study limitations. Reported risk estimates were mostly null, ranged widely from below to above 1, and often had extremely wide confidence intervals (CIs), indicating unstable risk estimates. In addition, there was no consistent evidence of dose-response. Overall, given the low quality of the available epidemiology studies, the evidence does not support an association between PCE exposure and NHL.
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.