ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental medicine2025
Development and Evaluation of the Firefighter Exposure to Carcinogens Scale.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2025. 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFirefighters are exposed to carcinogens from combustion, necessitating decontamination practices. This study developed and validated the Firefighter Exposure to Carcinogens Scale (FECS) to assess exposure-mitigating behaviors.
methodsThe sample included 179 volunteer firefighters from across Canada, comprising both English and French speakers, evaluated 20 items on exposure prevention across the following three dimensions: perceived importance, past behavior, and future intention. Principal axis factor analysis was conducted, and parallel analysis based on principal components determined the number of factors. McDonald's Omega measured internal consistency, and item-total correlations were examined.
resultsA one-factor solution was acceptable for all scales, with high coefficient omega values indicating strong internal consistency. Small mean differences between language groups were nonsignificant, and no correlations were found with demographic variables.
conclusionsThe FECS is a reliable, valid one-factor model for both languages, supporting cancer prevention efforts.
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.