Dataset Information

Incidence of lung cancer and mortality among civil construction industry workers: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The construction sector is one of the most stable growth industries in the world. However, many studies have suggested an association between occupational exposure in civil construction and lung cancer risk. Thus, this study aims to assess lung cancer risk in civil construction workers occupationally exposed to physical and chemical agents through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods/design

Studies will be identified by searching PUBMED, Embase, SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE and the reference list of included articles. Eligible study designs will be cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies that report occupational exposure to physical or chemical agents and lung cancer risk through mortality or incidence outcomes. A meta-analysis will be used to combine odds ratios (ORs) from case-control studies and relative risks (RR) from cohort studies. Two reviewers will independently screen articles, extract data, and assess scientific quality using standardized forms and ROBINS-E tool if available. Otherwise, the New-Castle Ottawa rating scale will be used. Any of those will also be used in combination with the GRADE approach for quality of evidence. Overall risk estimates and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) will be obtained using the random-effects model meta-analysis. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

Discussion

This review will identify and synthesize studies investigating the association between occupational exposure in the construction industry and lung cancer. The findings will help governmental entities and researchers with evidence-based decision-making because they will integrate and validate the evidence on construction workers' health effects due to occupational exposure.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42020164209.

SUBMITTER: Cahuana Pinto RSM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8075260 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Civil construction is one of the industrial sectors with continuous growth globally, particularly in Brazil in the last 50 years. Unfortunately, it is also one of the productive segments with the highest incidence of accidents, which overshadows its merits as a driver of economic growth and job creation. The damage to workers' health caused by accidents at work results from the presence of work environment risk factors. Therefore, this study aims to manage these risk factors for the civil construction industry. The work is original with respect to building a model to support risk management in civil construction for a specific and relevant context. It is ensured by presenting an unprecedented approach to the sector that incorporates information not considered by classic generic approaches. This research, thereby, seeks to build a model to support the risk management of accidents in the workplace in the prefabricated concrete construction industry. It is a case study with a constructivist approach and an exploratory and descriptive character, incorporating the Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding-Constructivist (MCDA-C). The main findings include (i) identifying the strategic objectives: occupational safety policy, work environment, machines and equipment, condition of materials, procedures and methods, and skills, which were operationalized via 58 criteria; (ii) examining the scales of the criteria such as the performance profile of the current situation and the goal, highlighting the vulnerabilities and potentials; (iii) proposing improvement actions for the vulnerabilities, thus supporting risk management in the organization. Among the contributions, managers and professionals in the field contribute to the possibility of using an instrument customized to the context and legitimate to their concerns and values stands out. Furthermore, the contributions of researchers include the challenge of improving their generic models with the knowledge of personalized models.

Project description:BackgroundBreast Cancer (BC) is the leading cause of deaths in Indian women. Emerging reports reveal alarming evidence of increasing incidence and mortality of BC among young Indian women in addition to the late presentation and poor prognosis. Despite the significant incidence, there is a lack of reliable data resources and comprehensive epidemiologic studies relating to BC. The objective of this protocol is to conduct a full-scale systematic review and meta-analyses on the incidence, prevalence, and mortality of BC in 29 states and seven union territories of India.MethodsData sources used will be Cochrane Review, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science, and international and national cancer registries such as World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and National Centre for Disease Information and Research (NCDIR)-National Cancer Registry Program initiated by Indian Council of Medical Research. Relevant data will be extracted using a predefined data collection form. A defined search strategy will be implemented along with selection criteria to obtain full-text articles of relevant studies. This study protocol was prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Protocols 2015 guidelines. Odds ratios (ORs) will be used to measure effect size. The random or fixed-effects meta-analyses model will be employed to aggregate the pooled estimates (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) separately. A forest plot will be produced to assess ORs and 95% CIs. Publication bias will be assessed using funnel plot, and Egger regression will be applied to test the symmetry of the funnel plot.Ethics and disseminationThis proposed study will be based on published studies and the data from cancer registries. Therefore, human research ethics approval is not required. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration noCRD42018084003.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify and summarise all studies using statistical methods to project lung cancer incidence or mortality rates more than 5 years into the future.Study typeSystematic review.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in multiple electronic databases to identify studies published from 1 January 1988 to 14 August 2018, which used statistical methods to project lung cancer incidence and/or mortality rates. Reference lists of relevant articles were checked for additional potentially relevant articles. We developed an organisational framework to classify methods into groups according to the type of data and the statistical models used. Included studies were critically appraised using prespecified criteria.ResultsOne hundred and one studies met the inclusion criteria; six studies used more than one statistical method. The number of studies reporting statistical projections for lung cancer increased substantially over time. Eighty-eight studies used projection methods, which did not incorporate data on smoking in the population, and 16 studies used a method which did incorporate data on smoking. Age-period-cohort models (44 studies) were the most commonly used methods, followed by other generalised linear models (35 studies). The majority of models were developed using observed rates for more than 10?years and used data that were considered to be good quality. A quarter of studies provided comparisons of fitted and observed rates. While validation by withholding the most recent observed data from the model and then comparing the projected and observed rates for the most recent period provides important information on the model's performance, only 12 studies reported doing this.ConclusionThis systematic review provides an up-to-date summary of the statistical methods used in published lung cancer incidence or mortality projections. The assessment of the strengths of existing methods will help researchers to better apply and develop statistical methods for projecting lung cancer rates. Some of the common methods described in this review can be applied to the projection of rates for other cancer types or other non-infectious diseases.

Project description:BackgroundRisk for lung cancer in workers exposed to benzidine (BZ) and/or beta-naphthylamine (BNA), which are well-known bladder carcinogens, has been examined in many epidemiological studies, but individual epidemiological studies generally lack the power to examine the association between BZ/BNA exposure and lung cancer. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the risk for lung cancer among workers exposed to BZ/BNA occupationally.Methods/designStudies will be identified by a MEDLINE, EMBASE, CDSR, and CINAHL search and by the reference lists of articles/relevant reviews. Eligible studies will be cohort and case-control studies that report occupational BZ/BNA exposure and the outcome of interest (lung cancer death/incidence). The method of meta-analysis will be used to combine standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and/or standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) from retrospective and prospective cohort studies and odds ratios (ORs) from case-control studies. Two reviewers will independently screen articles, extract data, and assess scientific quality using standardized forms and published quality assessment tools tailored for each study design. Overall pooled risk estimates and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) will be obtained using random effects model. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines, and results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.DiscussionThis review will identify and synthesize studies of the association between occupational BZ/BNA exposure and lung cancer. The findings will help to identify whether BZ/BNA could cause lung cancer and might indicate whether workers with exposure to BZ/BNA have a need for preventive measures against non-urological cancer besides bladder cancer.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42014010250.

Project description:We conducted a meta-analysis to examinine the relationship between exposure to PM2.5 and lung cancer incidence and mortality. In total, 17 studies met our inclusion criteria and provided information necessary to estimate the change in lung cancer risk per 10 ?g/m3 increase in exposure to PM2.5. The random-effects model was used to estimate the relative risk (RR) for specific PM2.5 values. The meta-estimate for lung cancer risk associated with PM2.5 was 1.11 for mortality (95% CI: 1.05, 1.18) and 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.12) for incidence. Analyses by continent showed that the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 was greatest in North America [1.15 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.24)], followed by Asia [1.12 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.35)], and then Europe [1.05 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.10)]. Lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 was greatest in Asia [1.09 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.15)], followed by North America [1.06 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.11)], and then Europe [1.03 (95% CI: 0.61, 1.75)]. In subgroup analyses of country, the mortality meta-estimate for developed countries was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.23), and for developing countries was 1.03 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.07). The incidence meta-estimate for developed countries was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.20), and was similar to that of developing countries, 1.07 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.09). In subgroup analyses of males and females, the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 was greater for males [1.26 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.40)] than for females [1.17 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.39)]. The meta-estimate for lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 was greater for males [1.23 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.81)] than for females [1.15 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.18)]. In subgroup analyses of smoking status, the meta-estimate for lung cancer mortality associated with PM2.5 for former smokers was 1.46 (95% CI: 0.84, 2.55), for current smokers was 1.33 (95% CI: 1.20, 1.49), and for never smokers was 1.16 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.33), respectively. The meta-estimate for lung cancer incidence associated with PM2.5 for former smokers was 1.19 (95% CI: 0.95, 1.50), for never smokers was 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59), and for current smokers was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.21). The relative risks of a relationship between PM2.5 and lung cancer incidence and mortality were 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.12) and 1.11 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.18), respectively. These findings will provide some evidence for policy makers and public health practitioners worldwide.