ArticleCureus2024
Larger Airway Functions in Poultry and Dairy Confinement Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe peak expiratory flow (PEF) test is a crucial tool for assessing larger airway functions, particularly in individuals exposed to occupational hazards. This study aims to compare PEF values between animal workers (poultry and dairy farm workers) who are regularly exposed to animal allergens and other respiratory irritants and normal workers who do not have such exposures.
methodsA cohort of animal workers from poultry and dairy farms were evaluated alongside a control group of normal workers without known respiratory hazards. PEF measurements were taken using a computerized spirometer, and results were analyzed to determine differences in respiratory function between the two groups.
resultsThere was a significant difference in PEF values, with animal workers exhibiting lower PEF compared to their control group. Further, poultry farm workers had a significant decrease in PEF when compared to dairy farm workers. This study represents a pioneering effort in the comparative analysis of respiratory health among workers in poultry and dairy farms.
conclusionsThe findings indicate that occupational exposure to allergens and irritants associated with animal environments may have deleterious effects on respiratory health. Further analysis, controlling for confounding variables such as smoking status, age, and baseline health conditions, reinforces the initial observation of compromised respiratory function in animal workers. This study underscores the importance of regular respiratory health monitoring and implementation of protective measures for individuals in occupations with high exposure to respiratory irritants. Enhanced awareness and preventive strategies could mitigate the long-term health impacts on animal workers, ensuring safer working environments and improved overall health outcomes.
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.