-
Pulmonology Jun 2023Silicosis mostly happens in workers with high silica exposure and may accompany the development of various diseases like tuberculosis, cancer, or autoimmune diseases.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Silicosis mostly happens in workers with high silica exposure and may accompany the development of various diseases like tuberculosis, cancer, or autoimmune diseases. The term silico-tuberculosis describes a condition in which an individual is affected by both silicosis and tuberculosis at the same time. This systematic review and meta-analysis study was conducted to evaluate the risk of tuberculosis in silicosis patients and individuals exposed to silica dust.
METHODS
We performed a systematic search for relevant studies up to 6 September 2022 using PubMed/ Medline, and Embase with the following keywords in titles or abstracts: "silicosis" OR "silicoses" OR "pneumoconiosis" OR "pneumoconioses" AND "tuberculosis". Cohort and case-control studies containing relevant and original information about tuberculosis infection in silicosis patients were included for further analysis. Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the relative risk of tuberculosis in individuals with silicosis compared to those without; these were evaluated using the random effects model due to the estimated heterogeneity of the true effect sizes.
RESULTS
Out of 5352 potentially relevant articles, 7 studies were eligible for systematic review, of which 4 cohort studies were included for meta-analysis. The total population of all studies was 5884, and 90.63% were male. The mean age of participants was 47.7 years. Our meta-analysis revealed a pooled risk ratio of 1.35 (95%CI 1.18-1.53, I : 94.30%) which means an increased risk of silicosis patients and silica-exposed individuals to tuberculosis infection.
CONCLUSION
Silicosis and silica dust exposure increase the risk of tuberculosis. Therefore, we suggest that individuals with long-time silica exposure, like mine workers, be routinely considered for both silicosis and tuberculosis screening programs.
PubMed: 37349198
DOI: 10.1016/j.pulmoe.2023.05.001 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jan 2024Molecular pathways found to be important in pulmonary fibrosis are also involved in cancer pathogenesis, suggesting common pathways in the development of pulmonary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Molecular pathways found to be important in pulmonary fibrosis are also involved in cancer pathogenesis, suggesting common pathways in the development of pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer.
RESEARCH QUESTION
Is pulmonary fibrosis from exposure to occupational carcinogens an independent risk factor for lung cancer?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases with over 100 search terms regarding occupational hazards causing pulmonary fibrosis was conducted. After screening and extraction, quality of evidence and eligibility criteria for meta-analysis were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
52 studies were identified for systematic review. Meta-analysis of subgroups identified silicosis as a risk factor for lung cancer when investigating odds ratios for silicosis in autopsy studies (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.90) and for lung cancer mortality in patients with silicosis (OR 3.21, 95% CI 2.67-3.87). Only considering studies with an adjustment for smoking as a confounder identified a significant increase in lung cancer risk (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34-1.87). However, due to a lack of studies including cumulative exposure, no adjustments could be included. In a qualitative review, no definitive conclusion could be reached for asbestosis and silicosis as independent risk factors for lung cancer, partly because the studies did not take cumulative exposure into account.
INTERPRETATION
This systematic review confirms the current knowledge regarding asbestosis and silicosis, indicating a higher risk of lung cancer in exposed individuals compared to exposed workers without fibrosis. These individuals should be monitored for lung cancer, especially when asbestosis or silicosis is present.
Topics: Humans; Silicon Dioxide; Lung Neoplasms; Pulmonary Fibrosis; Asbestosis; Silicosis; Occupational Exposure
PubMed: 38355151
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0224-2023 -
Environment International Aug 2023The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large number of individual experts. Evidence from human, animal and mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal dust) causes pneumoconiosis. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust. These estimates of prevalences and levels will serve as input data for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years that are attributable to occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust among working-age (≥ 15 years) workers.
DATA SOURCES
We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA
We included working-age (≥ 15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (< 15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included all study types with objective dust or fibre measurements, published between 1960 and 2018, that directly or indirectly reported an estimate of the prevalence and/or level of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and/or coal dust.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, then data were extracted from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates by industrial sector (ISIC-4 2-digit level with additional merging within Mining, Manufacturing and Construction) using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and all available authors assessed the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
RESULTS
Eighty-eight studies (82 cross-sectional studies and 6 longitudinal studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising > 2.4 million measurements covering 23 countries from all WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, South-East Asia, Europe, and Western Pacific). The target population in all 88 included studies was from major ISCO groups 3 (Technicians and Associate Professionals), 6 (Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers), 7 (Craft and Related Trades Workers), 8 (Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers), and 9 (Elementary Occupations), hereafter called manual workers. Most studies were performed in Construction, Manufacturing and Mining. For occupational exposure to silica, 65 studies (61 cross-sectional studies and 4 longitudinal studies) were included with > 2.3 million measurements collected in 22 countries in all six WHO regions. For occupational exposure to asbestos, 18 studies (17 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal) were included with > 20,000 measurements collected in eight countries in five WHO regions (no data for Africa). For occupational exposure to coal dust, eight studies (all cross-sectional) were included comprising > 100,000 samples in six countries in five WHO regions (no data for Eastern Mediterranean). Occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust was assessed with personal or stationary active filter sampling; for silica and asbestos, gravimetric assessment was followed by technical analysis. Risk of bias profiles varied between the bodies of evidence looking at asbestos, silica and coal dust, as well as between industrial sectors. However, risk of bias was generally highest for the domain of selection of participants into the studies. The largest bodies of evidence for silica related to the industrial sectors of Construction (ISIC 41-43), Manufacturing (ISIC 20, 23-25, 27, 31-32) and Mining (ISIC 05, 07, 08). For Construction, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93, 17 studies, I 91%, moderate quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91, 24 studies, I 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. The pooled prevalence estimate for Mining was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, 20 studies, I 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.04 mg/m (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, 17 studies, I 100%, low quality of evidence). Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Crop and animal production (ISIC 01; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Professional, scientific and technical activities (ISIC 71, 74; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level). For asbestos, the pooled prevalence estimate for Construction (ISIC 41, 43, 45,) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, six studies, I 99%, low quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing (ISIC 13, 23-24, 29-30), the pooled prevalence and level estimates were rated as being of very low quality of evidence. Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Other mining and quarrying (ISIC 08; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation (ISIC 37; very low quality of evidence for levels). For coal dust, the pooled prevalence estimate for Mining of coal and lignite (ISIC 05), was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, six studies, I 16%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.77 mg/m (95% CI 0.68 to 0.86, three studies, I 100%, low quality of evidence). A small body of evidence was identified for Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35); with very low quality of evidence for prevalence, and the pooled level estimate being 0.60 mg/m (95% CI -6.95 to 8.14, one study, low quality of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, we judged the bodies of evidence for occupational exposure to silica to vary by industrial sector between very low and moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and very low and low for level. For occupational exposure to asbestos, the bodies of evidence varied by industrial sector between very low and low quality of evidence for prevalence and were of very low quality of evidence for level. For occupational exposure to coal dust, the bodies of evidence were of very low or moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and low for level. None of the included studies were population-based studies (i.e., covered the entire workers' population in the industrial sector), which we judged to present serious concern for indirectness, except for occupational exposure to coal dust within the industrial sector of mining of coal and lignite. Selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica by industrial sector are considered suitable as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, and selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to asbestos and coal dust may perhaps also be suitable for estimation purposes. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.005. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084131.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Occupational Diseases; Dust; Prevalence; Silicon Dioxide; Cross-Sectional Studies; Coal; Steam; Asbestos; Occupational Exposure; World Health Organization; Cost of Illness
PubMed: 37487377
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107980 -
Toxics Oct 2022There is contrasting data on the association between talc exposure and lung and pleural cancer. Given the potential importance of this aspect, we performed a systematic... (Review)
Review
There is contrasting data on the association between talc exposure and lung and pleural cancer. Given the potential importance of this aspect, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between working in the talc extractive industry and mortality from malignant and non-malignant respiratory diseases. We followed PRISMA guidelines to systematically search for pertinent articles in three relevant electronic databases: Pubmed, Scopus, and WebOfScience, from their inception to 30 November 2021. The methodological quality of included articles was evaluated using the US National Institutes of Health tool. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for malignant and non-malignant respiratory diseases as well as respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted or calculated for each included cohort. Six articles comprising 7 cohorts were included in the metanalysis. There was increased mortality for pneumoconiosis, especially in the miner's group (SMR = 7.90, CI 95% 2.77-22.58) and especially in those exposed to higher quartz concentration and for non-malignant respiratory diseases in the overall analysis (SMR = 1.81, CI 95% 1.15-2.82). The risk for lung cancer mortality was slightly increased in the overall analysis (SMR = 1.42, CI 95% 1.07-1.89). The risk for malignant mesothelioma could not be calculated due to an insufficient number of studies assessing this outcome. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence that men working in the talc mining industry have increased mortality for non-malignant respiratory diseases including pneumoconiosis. The small excess in lung cancer mortality may be, in part, explained by the high prevalence of the smokers in some of the analyzed cohorts or by the exposure to other carcinogens like radon decay products and diesel engine exhaust.
PubMed: 36287869
DOI: 10.3390/toxics10100589 -
BMC Public Health May 2021While the association between occupational inhalation of silica dust and pulmonary tuberculosis has been known for over a century, there has never been a published... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
While the association between occupational inhalation of silica dust and pulmonary tuberculosis has been known for over a century, there has never been a published systematic review, particularly of experience in the current era of less severe silicosis and treatable tuberculosis. We undertook a systematic review of the evidence for the association between (1) silicosis and pulmonary tuberculosis, and (2) silica exposure and pulmonary tuberculosis controlling for silicosis, and their respective exposure-response gradients.
METHODS
We searched PUBMED and EMBASE, and selected studies according to a priori inclusion criteria. We extracted, summarised and pooled the results of published case-control and cohort studies of silica exposure and/or silicosis and incident active tuberculosis. Study quality was assessed on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Where meta-analysis was possible, effect estimates were pooled using inverse-variance weighted random-effects models. Otherwise narrative and graphic synthesis was undertaken. Confidence regarding overall effect estimates was assessed using the GRADE schema.
RESULTS
Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of eight studies of silicosis and tuberculosis yielded a pooled relative risk of 4.01 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.88, 5.58). Exposure-response gradients were strong with a low silicosis severity threshold for increased risk. Our GRADE assessment was high confidence in a strong association. Meta-analysis of five studies of silica exposure controlling for or excluding silicosis yielded a pooled relative risk of 1.92 (95% CI 1.36, 2.73). Exposure-response gradients were observable in individual studies but not finely stratified enough to infer an exposure threshold. Our GRADE assessment was low confidence in the estimated effect owing to inconsistency and use of proxies for silica exposure.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is robust for a strongly elevated risk of tuberculosis with radiological silicosis, with a low disease severity threshold. The effect estimate is more uncertain for silica exposure without radiological silicosis. Research is needed, particularly cohort studies measuring silica exposure in different settings, to characterise the effect more accurately as well as the silica exposure threshold that could be used to prevent excess tuberculosis risk.
Topics: Dust; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Risk Factors; Silicon Dioxide; Silicosis
PubMed: 34016067
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-10711-1 -
BMJ Open Mar 2023To determine the incidence of pneumoconiosis worldwide and its influencing factors. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To determine the incidence of pneumoconiosis worldwide and its influencing factors.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Cohort studies on occupational pneumoconiosis.
PARTICIPANTS
PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched until November 2021. Studies were selected for meta-analysis if they involved at least one variable investigated as an influencing factor for the incidence of pneumoconiosis and reported either the parameters and 95% CIs of the risk fit to the data, or sufficient information to allow for the calculation of those values.
PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES
The pooled incidence of pneumoconiosis and risk ratio (RR) and 95% CIs of influencing factors.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis included 19 studies with a total of 335 424 participants, of whom 29 972 developed pneumoconiosis. The pooled incidence of pneumoconiosis was 0.093 (95% CI 0.085 to 0.135). We identified the following influencing factors: (1) male (RR 3.74; 95% CI 1.31 to 10.64; p=0.01), (2) smoking (RR 1.80; 95% CI 1.34 to 2.43; p=0.0001), (3) tunnelling category (RR 4.75; 95% CI 1.96 to 11.53; p<0.0001), (4) helping category (RR 0.07; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.16; p<0.0001), (5) age (the highest incidence occurs between the ages of 50 and 60), (6) duration of dust exposure (RR 4.59, 95% CI 2.41 to 8.74, p<0.01) and (7) cumulative total dust exposure (CTD) (RR 34.14, 95% CI 17.50 to 66.63, p<0.01). A dose-response analysis revealed a significant positive linear dose-response association between the risk of pneumoconiosis and duration of exposure and CTD (P-non-linearity=0.10, P-non-linearity=0.16; respectively). The Pearson correlation analysis revealed that silicosis incidence was highly correlated with cumulative silica exposure (r=0.794, p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
The incidence of pneumoconiosis in occupational workers was 0.093 and seven factors were found to be associated with the incidence, providing some insight into the prevention of pneumoconiosis.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022323233.
Topics: Male; Humans; Middle Aged; Incidence; Pneumoconiosis; Dust; Odds Ratio; PubMed
PubMed: 36858466
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065114 -
Cureus Jan 2024This systematic review examines the transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in managing lung disorders through a comprehensive analysis of articles... (Review)
Review
This systematic review examines the transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in managing lung disorders through a comprehensive analysis of articles spanning 2014 to 2023. Evaluating AI's multifaceted roles in radiological imaging, disease burden prediction, detection, diagnosis, and molecular mechanisms, this review presents a critical synthesis of key insights from select articles. The findings underscore AI's significant strides in bolstering diagnostic accuracy, interpreting radiological imaging, predicting disease burdens, and deepening the understanding of tuberculosis (TB), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), silicosis, pneumoconiosis, and lung fibrosis. The synthesis positions AI as a revolutionary tool within the healthcare system, offering vital implications for healthcare workers, policymakers, and researchers in comprehending and leveraging AI's pivotal role in lung disease management.
PubMed: 38313926
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51581 -
BMJ Open Apr 2017Based on findings from a systematic literature search, we present and discuss the evidence for an association between exposure to cement dust and non-malignant... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Based on findings from a systematic literature search, we present and discuss the evidence for an association between exposure to cement dust and non-malignant respiratory effects in cement production workers.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic literature searches (MEDLINE and Embase) were performed. Outcomes were restricted to respiratory symptoms, lung function indices, asthma, chronic bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumoconiosis, induced sputum or fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) measurements.
PARTICIPANTS
The studies included exposed cement production workers and non-exposed or low-exposed referents.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES
The searches yielded 594 references, and 26 articles were included. Cross-sectional studies show reduced lung function levels at or above 4.5 mg/m of total dust and 2.2 mg/m of respiratory dust. ORs for symptoms ranged from 1.2 to 4.8, while FEV/FVC was 1-6% lower in exposed than in controls. Cohort studies reported a high yearly decline in FEV/FVC ranging from 0.8% to 1.7% for exposed workers. 1 longitudinal study reported airflow limitation at levels of exposure comparable to ∼1 mg/m respirable and 3.7-5.4 mg/m total dust. A dose-response relationship between exposure and decline in lung function has only been shown in 1 cohort. 2 studies have detected small increases in FeNO levels during a work shift; 1 study reported signs of airway inflammation in induced sputum, whereas another did not detect an increase in hospitalisation rates.
CONCLUSIONS
Lack of power, adjustment for possible confounders and other methodological issues are limitations of many of the included studies. Hence, no firm conclusions can be drawn. There are few longitudinal data, but recent studies report a dose-response relationship between cement production dust exposure and declining lung function indicating a causal relationship, and underlining the need to reduce exposure among workers in this industry.
Topics: Air Pollutants, Occupational; Construction Materials; Humans; Lung; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 28442577
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012381 -
Occupational and Environmental Medicine Aug 2015To conduct a systematic review of changes in lung function in relation to presence of pleural plaques in asbestos-exposed populations. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review of changes in lung function in relation to presence of pleural plaques in asbestos-exposed populations.
METHODS
Database searches of PubMed and Web of Science were supplemented by review of papers' reference lists and journals' tables of contents. Methodological features (eg, consideration of potential confounding by smoking) of identified articles were reviewed by ≥ two reviewers. Meta-analyses of 20 studies estimated a summary effect of the decrements in per cent predicted (%pred) forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) associated with presence of pleural plaques.
RESULTS
Among asbestos-exposed workers, the presence of pleural plaques was associated with statistically significant decrements in FVC (4.09%pred, 95% CI 2.31 to 5.86) and FEV1 (1.99%pred, 95% CI 0.22 to 3.77). Effects of similar magnitude were seen when stratifying by imaging type (X-ray or high-resolution CT) and when excluding studies with potential methodological limitations. Undetected asbestosis was considered as an unlikely explanation of the observed decrements. Several studies provided evidence of an association between size of pleural plaques and degree of pulmonary decrease, and presence of pleural plaques and increased rate or degree of pulmonary impairment.
CONCLUSIONS
The presence of pleural plaques is associated with a small, but statistically significant mean difference in FVC and FEV1 in comparison to asbestos-exposed individuals without plaques or other abnormalities. From a public health perspective, small group mean decrements in lung function coupled with an increased rate of decline in lung function of the exposed population may be consequential.
Topics: Asbestos; Asbestosis; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Lung; Lung Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Pleura; Pleural Diseases; Smoking; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 25504898
DOI: 10.1136/oemed-2014-102468 -
PloS One 2021Coal mine dust lung disease comprises a group of occupational lung diseases including coal workers pneumoconiosis. In many countries, there is a lack of robust... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Coal mine dust lung disease comprises a group of occupational lung diseases including coal workers pneumoconiosis. In many countries, there is a lack of robust prevalence estimates for these diseases. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published contemporary estimates on prevalence, mortality, and survival for coal mine dust lung disease worldwide.
METHODS
Systematic searches of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases for English language peer-reviewed articles published from 1/1/2000 to 30/03/2021 that presented quantitative estimates of prevalence, mortality, or survival for coal mine dust lung disease. Review was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. Articles were screened independently by two authors. Studies were critically assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Pooled prevalence estimates were obtained using random effects meta-analysis models. Heterogeneity was measured using the I2 statistics and publication bias using Egger's tests.
RESULTS
Overall 40 studies were included, (31 prevalence, 8 mortality, 1 survival). Of the prevalence estimates, fifteen (12 from the United States) were retained for the meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence estimate for coal workers pneumoconiosis among underground miners was 3.7% (95% CI 3.0-4.5%) with high heterogeneity between studies. The pooled estimate of coal workers pneumoconiosis prevalence in the United States was higher in the 2000s than in the 1990s, consistent with published reports of increasing prevalence following decades of declining trends. Sub-group analyses also indicated higher prevalence among underground miners, and in Central Appalachia. The mortality studies were suggestive of reduced pneumoconiosis mortality rates over time, relative to the general population.
CONCLUSION
The ongoing prevalence of occupational lung diseases among contemporary coal miners highlights the importance of respiratory surveillance and preventive efforts through effective dust control measures. Limited prevalence studies from countries other than the United States limits our understanding of the current disease burden in other coal-producing countries.
Topics: Anthracosis; Coal Mining; Humans; International Agencies; Lung Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Prevalence
PubMed: 34343220
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255617