The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Chlorination, chlorination by-products, and cancer: a meta-analysis.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES. Individual epidemiological investigations into the association between chlorination by-products in drinking water and cancer have been suggestive but inconclusive. Enough studies exist to provide the basis for a meaningful meta-analysis. METHODS. An extensive literature search was performed to identify pertinent case-control studies and cohort studies. Consumption of chlorinated water, surface water, or water with high levels of chloroform was used as a surrogate for exposure to chlorination by-products. Relative risk estimates were abstracted from the individual studies and pooled. RESULTS. A simple meta-analysis of all cancer sites yielded a relative risk estimate for exposure to chlorination by-products of 1.15 (95% CI: 1.09, 1.20). Pooled relative risk estimates for organ-specific neoplasms were 1.21 (95% CI: 1.09, 1.34) for bladder cancer and 1.38 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.87) for rectal cancer. When studies that adjusted for potential confounders were pooled separately, estimates of relative risks did not change substantially. CONCLUSIONS. The results of this meta-analysis suggest a positive association between consumption of chlorination by-products in drinking water and bladder and rectal cancer in humans.
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
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial
Chalmers, T. C., Smith, H., Blackburn, B., Silverman, B., Schroeder, B., Reitman, D., & Ambroz, A. (1981) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(81)90056-8 · Cited by 1,349
Self-citation
Cited by
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Toledano, M. B., Eaton, N. E., Fawell, J., & Elliott, P. (2000) · Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1136/oem.57.2.73 · Cited by 591
Plewa, M. J., Wagner, E. D., Richardson, S. D., Thruston, A. D., Woo, Y.-T., & McKague, A. B. (2004) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es049971v · Cited by 517
Intervention Studies on Forgiveness: A Meta‐Analysis
Baskin, T. W., & Enright, R. D. (2004) · Journal of Counseling & Development · doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2004.tb00288.x · Cited by 420
Environmental pollutants and breast cancer: Epidemiologic studies
Brody, J. G., Moysich, K. B., Humblet, O., Attfield, K. R., Beehler, G. P., & Rudel, R. A. (2007) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.22655 · Cited by 375
Metadata
- Authors
- Morris, R. D., Audet, A. M., Angelillo, I. F., Chalmers, T. C., & Mosteller, F.
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 1992-07
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 955-963
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- OpenAlex
- W1991279332
- Cited by
- 545
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.33
- 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: Chlorination, chlorination by-products, and cancer: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2105/ajph.82.7.955
- The paper
- Morris, R. D., Audet, A. M., Angelillo, I. F., Chalmers, T. C., & Mosteller, F. (1992). Chlorination, chlorination by-products, and cancer: a meta-analysis. American Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.82.7.955
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.
