↓ Skip to main content

An updated re-analysis of the mortality risk from nasopharyngeal cancer in the National Cancer Institute formaldehyde worker cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An updated re-analysis of the mortality risk from nasopharyngeal cancer in the National Cancer Institute formaldehyde worker cohort study
Published in
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12995-016-0097-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary M. Marsh, Peter Morfeld, Sarah D. Zimmerman, Yimeng Liu, Lauren C. Balmert

Abstract

To determine whether the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) suggestion of a persistent increased mortality risk for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) in relation to formaldehyde (FA) exposure is robust with respect to alternative methods of data analysis. NCI provided the cohort data updated through 2004. We computed U.S. and local county rate-based standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and internal cohort rate-based relative risks (RR) in relation to four formaldehyde exposure metrics (highest peak, average intensity, cumulative, and duration of exposure), using both NCI categories and alternative categorizations. We modeled the plant group-related interaction structure using continuous and categorical forms of each FA exposure metric and evaluated the impact of NCI's decision to exclude non-exposed workers from the baseline category. Overall, our results corroborate the findings of our earlier reanalyses of data from the 1994 NCI cohort update. Six of 11 NPC deaths observed in the NCI study occurred in Plant 1, two (including the only additional NPC death) occurred in Plant 3 among workers in the lowest exposure category of highest peak, average intensity and cumulative FA exposure and in the second exposure category of duration of exposure, and the remaining cases occurred individually in three of eight remaining plants. A large, statistically significant, local rate-based NPC SMR of 7.34 (95 % CI = 2.69-15.97) among FA-exposed workers in Plant 1 contrasted with an 18 % deficit in NPC deaths (SMR = 0.82, 95 % CI = .17-2.41) among exposed workers in Plants 2-10. Overall, the new NCI findings led to: (1) reduced SMRs and RRs in the remaining nine study plants in unaffected exposure categories, (2) attenuated exposure-response relations for FA and NPC for all the FA metrics considered and (3) strengthened and expanded evidence that the earlier NCI internal analyses were non-robust and mis-specified as they did not account for a statistically significant interaction structure between plant group (Plant 1 vs. Plants 2-10) and FA exposure. Our updated reanalysis provided little or no evidence to support NCI's suggestion of a persistent association between FA exposure and mortality from NPC. NCI's suggestion continues to be driven heavily by anomalous findings in one study plant (Plant 1).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 9 25%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 9 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,362,070
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#212
of 393 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,189
of 298,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 393 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.