Cited by 53Occupational and environmental lung diseasesOccupational Health and Global JusticeOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

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

Open access
Schlünssen, Vivi, Mandrioli, Daniele, Pega, Frank, Momen, Natalie C., Ádám, Balázs, Chen, Weihong, Cohen, Robert A., Godderis, Lode +20 more·2023·Environment International

Abstract

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. 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 Data sources We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC.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 Member 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. 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). 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, I2 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, I2 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, I2 100%, moderate qualit

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107980

Cites

159 of 159 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many countries have established strict legal regulations for occupational exposure to biodurable fibres longer than 5 μm and thinner than 3 μm (critical fibres) because they are considered harmful due to respirability, biodurability, and length.

    “For occupational exposure to biodurable fibres longer than 5 μm and thinner than 3 μm—toxicologically ‘critical fibres’—many countries have established strict legal regulations, as such fibres are considered harmful due to their respirability, biodurability, and length [13].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 161 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 104th International Labour Conference. Transition from the informal to the formal economy (Recommendation No. 204). Available from: https://www.ilo.org/d yn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:R204, accessed 17 June 2021.; 2015.
  2. World Health Organization, 2021. The effect of occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation on malignant skin melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury. World Health Organization, Geneva.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schlünssen, V., Mandrioli, D., Pega, F., Momen, N. C., Ádám, B., Chen, W., Cohen, R. A., Godderis, L., Göen, T., Hadkhale, K., Kunpuek, W., Lou, J., Mandic-Rajcevic, S., Masci, F., Nemery, B., Popa, M., Rajatanavin, N., Sgargi, D., Siriruttanapruk, S., Sun, X., Suphanchaimat, R., Thammawijaya, P., Ujita, Y., van der Mierden, S., Vangelova, K., Ye, M., Zungu, M., & Scheepers, P. T. J.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Istituto Ramazzini (IT)
  • World Health Organization (CH)
  • United Arab Emirates University (AE)
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
  • Tampere University (FI)
  • Ministry of Public Health (TH)
  • Zhejiang Academy of Medical Sciences (CN)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
  • Chinese Center For Disease Control and Prevention (CN)
  • International Labour Organization (CH)
  • National Center of Public Health and Analyses (BG)
  • National Institute for Occupational Health (ZA)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Schlünssen, Vivi
  • Pega, Frank
Venue
Environment International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-08
Volume
178
Pages
107980
ISSN
0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4377194573
Cited by
53
References
161
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environment International (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • World Health Organization
  • National Research Centre
  • TU Graz, Internationale Beziehungen und Mobilitätsprogramme
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Occupational and environmental lung diseases
  • Social Sciences › Health › Occupational Health and Global Justice
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
occupational exposure, silica dust, asbestos fibers, coal dust, pneumoconiosis, prevalence, exposure levels, disability-adjusted life years, manufacturing industry, construction, informal economy, quality of evidence, risk of bias
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Asbestos, Coal, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dust, Humans, Occupational Diseases, Silicon Dioxide, Steam, World Health Organization, Prevalence, Occupational Exposure, Cost of Illness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review