Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 554

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

The Agricultural Health Study.

Open access
Alavanja, M C, Sandler, D P, McMaster, S B, Zahm, S H, McDonnell, C J, Lynch, C F, Pennybacker, M, Rothman, N, Dosemeci, M, Bond, A E, Blair, A·1996·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

The Agricultural Health Study, a large prospective cohort study has been initiated in North Carolina and Iowa. The objectives of this study are to: 1) identify and quantify cancer risks among men, women, whites, and minorities associated with direct exposure to pesticides and other agricultural agents; 2) evaluate noncancer health risks including neurotoxicity reproductive effects, immunologic effects, nonmalignant respiratory disease, kidney disease, and growth and development among children; 3) evaluate disease risks among spouses and children of farmers that may arise from direct contact with pesticides and agricultural chemicals used in the home lawns and gardens, and from indirect contact, such as spray drift, laundering work clothes, or contaminated food or water; 4) assess current and past occupational and nonoccupational agricultural exposures using periodic interviews and environmental and biologic monitoring; 5) study the relationship between agricultural exposures, biomarkers of exposure, biologic effect, and genetic susceptibility factors relevant to carcinogenesis; and 6) identify and quantify cancer and other disease risks associated with lifestyle factors such as diet, cooking practices, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption, and hair dye use. In the first year of a 3-year enrollment period, 26,235 people have been enrolled in the study, including 19,776 registered pesticide applicators and 6,459 spouses of registered farmer applicators. It is estimated that when the total cohort is assembled in 1997 it will include approximately 75,000 adult study subjects. Farmers, the largest group of registered pesticide applicators comprise 77% of the target population enrolled in the study. This experience compares favorably with enrollment rates of previous prospective studies.

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 · 10.1289/ehp.96104362

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 554

Metadata

Authors
Alavanja, M. C., Sandler, D. P., McMaster, S. B., Zahm, S. H., McDonnell, C. J., Lynch, C. F., Pennybacker, M., Rothman, N., Dosemeci, M., Bond, A. E., & Blair, A.
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
1996-04
Volume
104
Issue
4
Pages
362-369
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W2083091546
Cited by
554
References
1
FWCI
10.54
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: The Agricultural Health Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.96104362
The paper
Alavanja, M. C., Sandler, D. P., McMaster, S. B., Zahm, S. H., McDonnell, C. J., Lynch, C. F., Pennybacker, M., Rothman, N., Dosemeci, M., Bond, A. E., & Blair, A. (1996). The Agricultural Health Study. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.96104362

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.