Narrative review of occupational exposures and noncommunicable diseases.
Saved in:
| Title: | Narrative review of occupational exposures and noncommunicable diseases. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Peters, Susan1 s.peters@uu.nl, Undem, Karina2, Solovieva, Svetlana3, Selander, Jenny4, Schlünssen, Vivi5, Hengel, Karen M Oude6, Albin, Maria4, Ge, Calvin B6, Kjellberg, Katarina4,7, McElvenny, Damien M8,9, Gustavsson, Per4, Kolstad, Henrik A10, Würtz, Anne Mette L5, Brinchmann, Bendik C2, Broberg, Karin4, Fossum, Stine2, Bugge, Merete2, Christensen, Mette Wulf10, Ghosh, Manosij11, Christiansen, David Høyrup12 |
| Source: | Annals of Work Exposures & Health. Jul2024, Vol. 68 Issue 6, p562-580. 19p. |
| Subjects: | Mental illness risk factors, Tumor risk factors, Risk assessment, Metabolic disorders, Musculoskeletal system diseases, Sex distribution, Cadmium, Automobile emissions, Neurodegeneration, Cardiovascular diseases risk factors, Decision making, Non-communicable diseases, Occupational exposure, Lung diseases, Quality assurance, Employees' workload, Shift systems, Industrial hygiene, Disease risk factors |
| Abstract: | Objective Within the scope of the Exposome Project for Health and Occupational Research on applying the exposome concept to working life health, we aimed to provide a broad overview of the status of knowledge on occupational exposures and associated health effects across multiple noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) to help inform research priorities. Methods We conducted a narrative review of occupational risk factors that can be considered to have "consistent evidence for an association," or where there is "limited/inadequate evidence for an association" for 6 NCD groups: nonmalignant respiratory diseases; neurodegenerative diseases; cardiovascular/metabolic diseases; mental disorders; musculoskeletal diseases; and cancer. The assessment was done in expert sessions, primarily based on systematic reviews, supplemented with narrative reviews, reports, and original studies. Subsequently, knowledge gaps were identified, e.g. based on missing information on exposure–response relationships, gender differences, critical time-windows, interactions, and inadequate study quality. Results We identified over 200 occupational exposures with consistent or limited/inadequate evidence for associations with one or more of 60+ NCDs. Various exposures were identified as possible risk factors for multiple outcomes. Examples are diesel engine exhaust and cadmium, with consistent evidence for lung cancer, but limited/inadequate evidence for other cancer sites, respiratory, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular diseases. Other examples are physically heavy work, shift work, and decision latitude/job control. For associations with limited/inadequate evidence, new studies are needed to confirm the association. For risk factors with consistent evidence, improvements in study design, exposure assessment, and case definition could lead to a better understanding of the association and help inform health-based threshold levels. Conclusions By providing an overview of knowledge gaps in the associations between occupational exposures and their health effects, our narrative review will help setting priorities in occupational health research. Future epidemiological studies should prioritize to include large sample sizes, assess exposures prior to disease onset, and quantify exposures. Potential sources of biases and confounding need to be identified and accounted for in both original studies and systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Annals of Work Exposures & Health is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective Within the scope of the Exposome Project for Health and Occupational Research on applying the exposome concept to working life health, we aimed to provide a broad overview of the status of knowledge on occupational exposures and associated health effects across multiple noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) to help inform research priorities. Methods We conducted a narrative review of occupational risk factors that can be considered to have "consistent evidence for an association," or where there is "limited/inadequate evidence for an association" for 6 NCD groups: nonmalignant respiratory diseases; neurodegenerative diseases; cardiovascular/metabolic diseases; mental disorders; musculoskeletal diseases; and cancer. The assessment was done in expert sessions, primarily based on systematic reviews, supplemented with narrative reviews, reports, and original studies. Subsequently, knowledge gaps were identified, e.g. based on missing information on exposure–response relationships, gender differences, critical time-windows, interactions, and inadequate study quality. Results We identified over 200 occupational exposures with consistent or limited/inadequate evidence for associations with one or more of 60+ NCDs. Various exposures were identified as possible risk factors for multiple outcomes. Examples are diesel engine exhaust and cadmium, with consistent evidence for lung cancer, but limited/inadequate evidence for other cancer sites, respiratory, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular diseases. Other examples are physically heavy work, shift work, and decision latitude/job control. For associations with limited/inadequate evidence, new studies are needed to confirm the association. For risk factors with consistent evidence, improvements in study design, exposure assessment, and case definition could lead to a better understanding of the association and help inform health-based threshold levels. Conclusions By providing an overview of knowledge gaps in the associations between occupational exposures and their health effects, our narrative review will help setting priorities in occupational health research. Future epidemiological studies should prioritize to include large sample sizes, assess exposures prior to disease onset, and quantify exposures. Potential sources of biases and confounding need to be identified and accounted for in both original studies and systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 23987308 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/annweh/wxae045 |
