The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intensive livestock operations, health, and quality of life among eastern North Carolina residents.
Open accessAbstract
People who live near industrial swine operations have reported decreased health and quality of life. To investigate these issues, we surveyed residents of three rural communities, one in the vicinity of an approximately 6,000-head hog operation, one in the vicinity of two intensive cattle operations, and a third rural agricultural area without livestock operations that use liquid waste management systems. Trained interviewers obtained information about health symptoms and reduced quality of life during the previous 6 months. We completed 155 interviews, with a refusal rate of 14%. Community differences in the mean number of episodes were compared with adjustment for age, sex, smoking, and employment status. The average number of episodes of many symptoms was similar in the three communities; however, certain respiratory and gastrointestinal problems and mucous membrane irritation were elevated among residents in the vicinity of the hog operation. Residents in the vicinity of the hog operation reported increased occurrences of headaches, runny nose, sore throat, excessive coughing, diarrhea, and burning eyes as compared to residents of the community with no intensive livestock operations. Quality of life, as indicated by the number of times residents could not open their windows or go outside even in nice weather, was similar in the control and the community in the vicinity of the cattle operation but greatly reduced among residents near the hog operation. Respiratory and mucous membrane effects were consistent with the results of studies of occupational exposures among swine confinement-house workers and previous findings for neighbors of intensive swine operations. Long-term physical and mental health impacts could not be investigated in this study.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Results from the investigation showed an increase in reported headaches, runny nose, sore throat, excessive coughing, diarrhea, and burning eyes compared to residents of communities not located near intensive livestock operations ( 27,28 ).”
From Community-based participatory research as a tool to advance environmental health sciences (2002) · cites this paper as [27]
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
Thomas, S. B., & Quinn, S. C. (1991) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.81.11.1498 · Cited by 785
Environmental and health studies of farm workers in Swedish swine confinement buildings.
Donham, K. J., Haglind, P., Peterson, Y. A., Rylander, R., & Belin, L. (1989) · Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1136/oem.46.1.31 · Cited by 351
Schiffman, S. S., Miller, E. A., Suggs, M. S., & Graham, B. G. (1995) · Brain Research Bulletin · doi:10.1016/0361-9230(95)00015-1 · Cited by 269
Donham, K. J., Reynolds, S. J., Whitten, P. S., Merchant, J. A., Burmeister, L. F., & Popendorf, W. J. (1995) · American Journal of Industrial Medicine · doi:10.1002/ajim.4700270309 · Cited by 228
Environmental Injustice in North Carolina's Hog Industry
Wing, S., Cole, D. C., & Grant, G. (2000) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.00108225 · Cited by 196
Self-citationLivestock odors: implications for human health and well-being.
Schiffman, S. S. (1998) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/1998.7651343x · Cited by 195
Curran, W. J. (1973) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197310042891406 · Cited by 190
Swine Dust Causes Intense Airways Inflammation in Healthy Subjects
Larsson, K., Eklúnd, A., Hansson, L. O., Isaksson, B. M., & Malmberg, P. (1994) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.150.4.7921472 · Cited by 190
Heederik, D. J. J., Brouwer, R., BIERSTEKER, K., & Boleij, J. S. M. (1991) · International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health · doi:10.1007/bf00381114 · Cited by 174
Potential Health Hazards to Agricultural Workers in Swine Confinement Buildings
Donham, K. J., Rubino, M. J., Thedell, T. D., & Kammermeyer, J. K. (1977) · Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1097/00043764-197706000-00004 · Cited by 168
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Value and Challenges of Participatory Research: Strengthening Its Practice
Cargo, M., & Mercer, S. L. (2008) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.091307.083824 · Cited by 1,505
Community-based participatory research: assessing the evidence.
Viswanathan, M., Ammerman, A., Eng, E. M., Garlehner, G., Lohr, K. N., Griffith, D. M., Rhodes, S. D., Samuel‐Hodge, C. D., Maty, S. C., Lux, L. J., et al. (2004) · PubMed Central · Cited by 959
Community-based participatory research as a tool to advance environmental health sciences
O'Fallon, L. R., & Dearry, A. (2002) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.02110s2155 · Cited by 604
“Results from the investigation showed an increase in reported headaches, runny nose, sore throat, excessive coughing, diarrhea, and burning eyes compared to residents of communities not located near intensive livestock operations (27,28).”
BackgroundWyer, K. E., Kelleghan, D. B., Blanes‐Vidal, V., Schauberger, G., & Curran, T. P. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116285 · Cited by 599
Hu, Y., Cheng, H., & Tao, S. (2017) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2017.07.003 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Wing, S., & Wolf, S.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- ORCID
- Wing, S
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2000-03-01
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 233-238
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- PMC
- PMC1637983
- OpenAlex
- W2151911443
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 6.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor, 6512 d)
- Locations
- Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
- North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R25-ES08206-04, R25ES008206)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Process Chemistry and Technology › Odor and Emission Control Technologies
- Keywords
- cattle farming, rural residents, health symptoms, quality of life, respiratory symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, mucosal irritation, animal waste management, environmental exposure, eastern North Carolina
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Air Pollution, Animals, Animal Husbandry, Black or African American, Cattle, Environmental Exposure, Environmental Health, Female, Health Status, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, North Carolina, Poverty, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Residence Characteristics, Rural Health, Swine, Case-Control Studies
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
