ReviewOccupational and environmental medicine2024
Health Hazard Evaluations of occupational cancer cluster concerns: the USA, January 2001-December 2020.
Review in Occupational and environmental medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Update on Occupational Cancer for Better Cancer Prevention and Control.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo describe recent investigations of potential workplace cancer clusters.
methodsWe identified Health Hazard Evaluations (HHEs) of cancer concerns during 2001-2020. We described information about industry, requestors, cancer characteristics, investigative procedures, and determinations about the presence of a cluster (ie, presence of excess cases, unusual case distribution or exposure).
resultsOf 5754 HHEs, 174 included cancer concerns, comprising 1%-5% of HHEs per year. In 123 HHEs, the cancer cluster concerns involved different cancer primary sites. Investigation procedures varied but included record review (n=63, 36%) and site visits (n=22, 13%). Of 158 HHEs with a cluster determination by investigator(s), 151 (96%) were not considered cancer clusters. In seven HHEs, investigators found evidence of a cluster, but occupational exposure to a carcinogen was not identified.
conclusionsThe proportion of HHEs on workplace cancer cluster concerns remained steady over time; most did not meet the definition of a cluster or uncover an occupational cause. Public health practitioners can use this information to provide updated context when addressing workplace cancer cluster concerns and as motivation to refine investigative approaches. More broadly, this review highlights an opportunity to identify best practices on how to apply community cluster investigation methods to the workplace.
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.