Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 253

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Occupational cancer burden in Great Britain

Open access
Rushton, Lesley, Hutchings, Sally J, Fortunato, Lea, Young, Charlotte, Evans, Gareth S, Brown, Terry, Bevan, Ruth, Slack, Rebecca, Holmes, Phillip, Bagga, Sanjeev, Cherrie, John W, Van Tongeren, Martie·2012·British Journal of Cancer

Abstract

A sound knowledge base is required to target resources to reduce workplace exposure to carcinogens. This project aimed to provide an objective estimate of the burden of cancer in Britain due to occupation. This volume presents extensive analyses for all carcinogens and occupational circumstances defined as definite or probable human occupational carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. This article outlines the structure of the supplement - two methodological papers (statistical approach and exposure assessment), eight papers presenting the cancer-specific results grouped by broad anatomical site, a paper giving industry sector results and one discussing work-related cancer-prevention strategies. A brief summary of the methods and an overview of the updated overall results are given in this introductory paper. A general discussion of the overall strengths and limitations of the study is also presented. Overall, 8010 (5.3%) total cancer deaths in Britain and 13,598 cancer registrations were attributable to occupation in 2005 and 2004, respectively. The importance of cancer sites such as mesothelioma, sinonasal, lung, nasopharynx, breast, non-melanoma skin cancer, bladder, oesophagus, soft tissue sarcoma and stomach cancers are highlighted, as are carcinogens such as asbestos, mineral oils, solar radiation, silica, diesel engine exhaust, coal tars and pitches, dioxins, environmental tobacco smoke, radon, tetrachloroethylene, arsenic and strong inorganic mists, as well as occupational circumstances such as shift work and occupation as a painter or welder. The methods developed for this project are being adapted by other countries and extended to include social and economic impact evaluation.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/bjc.2012.112

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 253

Metadata

Authors
Rushton, L., Hutchings, S. J., Fortunato, L., Young, C., Evans, G. S., Brown, T., Bevan, R., Slack, R., Holmes, P., Bagga, S., Cherrie, J. W., & Van Tongeren, M.
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Published
2012-06
Volume
107
Issue
S1
Pages
S3-S7
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
OpenAlex
W2154137484
Cited by
253
References
1
FWCI
12.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Occupational cancer burden in Great Britain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/bjc.2012.112
The paper
Rushton, L., Hutchings, S. J., Fortunato, L., Young, C., Evans, G. S., Brown, T., Bevan, R., Slack, R., Holmes, P., Bagga, S., Cherrie, J. W., & Van Tongeren, M. (2012). Occupational cancer burden in Great Britain. British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.112

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.