| Title |
Systematic review and quantification of respiratory cancer risk for occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00420-012-0822-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andreas Seidler, Sabine Jähnichen, Janice Hegewald, Alba Fishta, Olga Krug, Luisa Rüter, Claudia Strik, Ernst Hallier, Sebastian Straube |
| Abstract |
To investigate the exposure-risk relationship for occupational chromium (VI) exposure and lung cancer in order to establish exposure limits. We systematically searched for studies reporting on occupational Cr(VI) exposure and cancers of the respiratory tract. To be included, studies needed to provide data for more than one level of occupational Cr(VI) exposure, adequately consider the confounder smoking and be of adequate methodological quality. Because direct genotoxicity was considered the predominant mechanism of carcinogenesis of Cr(VI), linear models were applied in order to fit risk data. Relative risks were calculated based on these linear regression models and then used to estimate excess absolute risks. Five studies of two cohorts of chromium production workers in Baltimore, Maryland, and Painesville, Ohio, were included. Based on different estimates for the exposure effect, the absolute excess risk was found to be "acceptable" (less than 4 per 10,000 according to the German Committee on Hazardous Substances, "AGS") at a Cr(VI) concentration of 0.1 μg/m(3), and became "intolerable" (more than 4 per 1,000) beyond a Cr(VI) concentration of 1 μg/m(3). Occupational exposure limits for Cr(VI) based on excess absolute risks can be derived from published data identified by a systematic literature review. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 12% |
| Engineering | 4 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#5,690,774
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
#382
of 1,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,038
of 177,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 177,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.