ArticleOccupational and environmental medicine2026
Occupational exposures among hairdressers and the occurrence of hormone-related conditions.
Article in Occupational and environmental medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the association between hairdresser exposures and hormone-related conditions.
methodsUsing data from 50 800 eligible Sister Study participants (enrolled 2003-2009, aged 35-74 years), we estimated ORs and 95% CIs for associations between ever working as a hairdresser (n=1803) and prevalent fibroids, endometriosis, hysterectomy and oophorectomy. We estimated HRs and 95% CI for incident fibroids, endometriosis, breast, uterine and ovarian cancers among ever hairdressers versus never hairdressers. We also examined associations of hormone-related diseases and professional use of products such as bleach, perms, chemical straighteners, permanent hair colour, hairspray, barbicide, formaldehyde and alcohol, comparing data from 985 long-term hairdressers who worked ≥2 years to non-long-term hairdressers (never workers and those working <2 years).
resultsEver-hairdressers were more likely than never-hairdressers to have had a prebaseline hysterectomy (OR=1.23: 95% CI 1.11 to 1.36). Hysterectomies were more common among long-term hairdressers with more frequent applications of perms, chemical straighteners and permanent hair colour compared with less frequent applicators or never hairdressers. Ever-hairdressers had higher rates of incident endometriosis (477 cases, HR=1.61: 95% CI 1.08 to 2.38) compared with never-hairdressers, but there were no notable associations between working as a hairdresser and fibroids (1805 cases, HR=1.04: 95% CI 0.80 to 1.34), breast cancer (4628 cases, HR=0.98: 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16), ovarian cancer (300 cases, HR=1.33: 95% CI 0.77 to 2.29) or uterine cancer (447 cases, HR=1.04: 95% CI 0.60 to 1.77). In race-stratified analyses, Black hairdressers were more likely to be diagnosed with fibroids than Black never-hairdressers (201 cases, HR=1.56: 95% CI 0.93 to 2.62).
conclusionsHairdresser occupation was associated with increased odds of hysterectomy and increased rates of incident endometriosis and possibly fibroids among Black women.
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.