ArticleOccupational medicine (Oxford, England)2025
Pitfalls of serum aluminium testing.
Article in Occupational medicine (Oxford, England), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This report is based on a case of a retired painter erroneously diagnosed with elevated serum aluminium levels. It highlights the problematic nature of serum aluminium testing, particularly when undertaken without convincing clinical support for excessive aluminium exposure. Here, we report on a retired painter, living near an automotive manufacturing plant, found to have elevated serum aluminium levels as part of comprehensive investigations for neuropsychiatric symptoms. His case coincided with a cluster of referrals to local toxicologists for elevated aluminium levels. Further investigations revealed a flaw in the laboratory testing protocol as the source of falsely elevated results. This case highlights the problematic nature of serum aluminium testing, particularly when undertaken without a convincing clinical correlation for toxicity.
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.