The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Health Effects of Airborne Exposures from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
Open accessAbstract
Toxic gases, vapors, and particles are emitted from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) into the general environment. These include ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, malodorous vapors, and particles contaminated with a wide range of microorganisms. Little is known about the health risks of exposure to these agents for people living in the surrounding areas. Malodor is one of the predominant concerns, and there is evidence that psychophysiologic changes may occur as a result of exposure to malodorous compounds. There is a paucity of data regarding community adverse health effects related to low-level gas and particulate emissions. Most information comes from studies among workers in CAFO installations. Research over the last decades has shown that microbial exposures, especially endotoxin exposure, are related to deleterious respiratory health effects, of which cross-shift lung function decline and accelerated decline over time are the most pronounced effects. Studies in naïve subjects and workers have shown respiratory inflammatory responses related to the microbial load. This working group, which was part of the Conference on Environmental Health Impacts of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: Anticipating Hazards-Searching for Solutions, concluded that there is a great need to evaluate health effects from exposures to the toxic gases, vapors, and particles emitted into the general environment by CAFOs. Research should focus not only on nuisance and odors but also on potential health effects from microbial exposures, concentrating on susceptible subgroups, especially asthmatic children and the elderly, since these exposures have been shown to be related to respiratory health effects among workers in CAFOs.
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.
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
Reduced risk of hay fever and asthma among children of farmers
Ehrenstein, V., Mutius, V., Illi, Baumann, Böhm, & Kries, V. (2000) · Clinical & Experimental Allergy · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2222.2000.00801.x · Cited by 718
Respiratory Health Hazards in Agriculture
(1998) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.158.supplement_1.rccm1585s1 · Cited by 495
Self-citation
Cited by
Wyer, 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 523
Indoor air pollution and the lung in low- and medium-income countries
Kurmi, O. P., Lam, K. B. H., & Ayres, J. G. (2012) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.00190211 · Cited by 196
Gatrell, S., Lum, K., Kim, J., & Lei, X. G. (2014) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/jas.2013-7250 · Cited by 102
Metadata
- Authors
- Heederik, D., Sigsgaard, T., Thorne, P. S., Kline, J. N., Avery, R., Bønløkke, J. H., Chrischilles, E. A., Dosman, J. A., Duchaine, C., Kirkhorn, S. R., Kulhankova, K., & Merchant, J. A.
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-02
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 298-302
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- OpenAlex
- W1971922461
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Health Effects of Airborne Exposures from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.8835
- The paper
- Heederik, D., Sigsgaard, T., Thorne, P. S., Kline, J. N., Avery, R., Bønløkke, J. H., Chrischilles, E. A., Dosman, J. A., Duchaine, C., Kirkhorn, S. R., Kulhankova, K., & Merchant, J. A. (2007). Health Effects of Airborne Exposures from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.8835
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.