Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 303

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

Occupational Dust Exposure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Overview of the Evidence

Oxman, Andrew D., Muir, David C. F., Shannon, Harry S., Stock, Susan R., Hnizdo, Eva, Lange, H. J.·1993·American Review of Respiratory Disease

Abstract

The object of this study was to assess the relationship between occupational dust exposure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Studies were identified using MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 1991), SCISEARCH, manual review of reference lists, and personal contact with more than 30 international experts. Studies of COPD, lung function, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, or mortality in workers exposed to nonorganic dust were retrieved. Studies were included if dust exposure was measured quantitatively, and a quantitative relationship between dust exposure and one of the outcomes of interest was calculated while controlling at least for smoking and age. Methodological rigor was assessed, and data regarding the study populations, prognostic factors, and outcomes were extracted independently by two reviewers. Thirteen reports derived from four cohorts of workers met our inclusion criteria. Three of the cohorts were of coal miners and one was of gold miners. All of the studies found a statistically significant association between loss of lung function and cumulative respirable dust exposure. It was estimated that 80 (95% CI, 34 to 137) of 1,000 nonsmoking coal miners with a cumulative respirable dust exposure of 122.5 gh/m3 (considered equivalent to 35 years of work with a mean respirable dust level of 2 mg/m3) could be expected to develop a clinically important (> 20%) loss of FEV1 attributable to dust. Among 1,000 smoking miners the comparable estimate was 66 (95% CI, 49 to 84). The risk of a clinically important loss of lung function attributable to dust among nonsmoking gold miners was estimated to be three times as large as for coal miners at less than one fifth of the cumulative respirable dust exposure (21.3 gh/m3), the maximal exposure observed among the cohort of gold miners. We conclude that occupational dust is an important cause of COPD, and the risk appears to be greater for gold miners than for coal miners. One possible explanation of the greater risk among gold miners is the higher silica content in gold mine dust.

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 · 10.1164/ajrccm/148.1.38

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

Cited by

See all 303

Metadata

Authors
Oxman, A. D., Muir, D. C. F., Shannon, H. S., Stock, S. R., Hnizdo, E., & Lange, H. J.
Venue
American Review of Respiratory Disease
Published
1993-07
Volume
148
Issue
1
Pages
38-48
ISSN
0003-0805 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045910931
Cited by
303
References
1
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Dust Exposure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Overview of the Evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/ajrccm/148.1.38
The paper
Oxman, A. D., Muir, D. C. F., Shannon, H. S., Stock, S. R., Hnizdo, E., & Lange, H. J. (1993). Occupational Dust Exposure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Overview of the Evidence. American Review of Respiratory Disease. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/148.1.38

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.