ArticleBMJ open2026
Prevalence of symptoms associated with occupational exposure to benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene among gas station workers: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGas station workers are at increased risk of inhaling volatile chemical compound vapours that may cause headaches, dizziness, fatigue, eye and nasal irritation, as well as haematological and neurological changes. This systematic review aims to estimate the prevalence of symptoms associated with occupational exposure to benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene vapours among fuel station workers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will be conducted between February and July 2026. Literature searches will be carried out between February and March 2026 across the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (PubMed/MEDLINE), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases. Grey literature will be searched using OpenGrey. Eligible studies will include cross-sectional and case-control designs. No language or publication date restrictions will be applied. The systematic review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two reviewers will independently select the studies, assess their eligibility using predefined criteria and standardised forms, and extract data. Combined prevalence estimates will be calculated in the meta-analysis using a random effects model with 95% CIs. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RevMan (version 5.3.5) will be used for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this protocol, as the review and meta-analysis will be based exclusively on secondary data and will not involve the collection of primary data. Findings will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences, publication in peer-reviewed journals, and communication with workers, employers and policy-makers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251159127.
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.