ArticleAnnals of occupational and environmental medicine2024
Cooking oil fume exposure and Lung-RADS distribution among school cafeteria workers of South Korea.
Article in Annals of 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 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recurrent laryngeal leukoplakia in a cook occupationally exposed to cooking oil fumes: a case report.Annals of occupational and environmental medicine · 2026Article
- Lung cancer screening in occupational settings: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Etiology and risk factors for lung cancer in female Asian never smokers: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Review
- Radiological Changes in Chest Computed Tomography Findings of School Cooks: A Comparative Study With Age-matched Controls.Safety and health at work · 2025Article
- Lung Cancer Risk in Female School Cooks: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study in the Republic of Korea.Safety and health at work · 2025Article
- Radiologic evaluation of subclinical cardiovascular structural changes in school cafeteria workers: a chest computed tomography study with age-matched controls.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2025Article
- Cancer-related Keywords in 2023: Insights from Text Mining of a Major Consumer Portal.Healthcare informatics research · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cooking oil fumes (COFs) from cooking with hot oil may contribute to the pathogenesis of lung cancer. Since 2021, occupational lung cancer for individual cafeteria workers has been recognized in South Korea. In this study, we aimed to identify the distribution of lung-imaging reporting and data system (Lung-RADS) among cafeteria workers and to determine factors related to Lung-RADS distribution. Methods: We included 203 female participants who underwent low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening at a university hospital and examined the following variables: age, smoking status, second-hand smoke, height, weight, and years of service, mask use, cooking time, heat source, and ventilation. We divided all participants into culinary and non-culinary workers. Binomial logistic regression was conducted to determine the risk factors on LDCT of Category ≥ 3, separately for the overall group and the culinary group. Results: In this study, Lung-RADS-positive occurred in 17 (8.4%) individuals, all of whom were culinary workers. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed and no variables were found to have a significant impact on Lung-RADS results. In the subgroup analysis, the Lung-RADS-positive, and -negative groups differed only in ventilation. Binary logistic regression showed that the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of the Lung-RADS-positive group for inappropriate ventilation at the workplace was 14.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.296-67.231) compared to appropriate ventilation as the reference, and the aOR for electric appliances at home was 4.59 (95% CI: 1.061-19.890) using liquid fuel as the reference. Conclusions: The rate of Lung-RADS-positive was significantly higher among culinary workers who performed actual cooking tasks than among nonculinary workers. In addition, appropriate ventilation at the workplace made the LDCT results differ. More research is needed to identify factors that might influence LDCT findings among culinary workers, including those in other occupations.
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.