American journal of industrial medicine · 2017
Corporate corruption of science-Another asbestos example.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Egilman David, Monárrez Rubén
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Kelsh et al. [2007]: Occup Med (Lond) 57:581-589 published a paper reanalyzing one of the few data sources publicly available on mesothelioma amongst brake workers, the Australian Mesothelioma Surveillance Registry (AMSR). This reanalysis was commissioned by lawyers representing the automobile manufacturing companies and did not align with an independent analysis published by Leigh and Driscoll [2003]: Occup Environ Health 9:206-217.
METHODS: We sought to reevaluate the AMSR data ourselves to understand how the company-sponsored research categorized the data.
RESULTS: In our re-analysis of the 78 brake-related folios in the AMSR, we determined that 57 were employed brake mechanics, 35 were employed brake mechanics with no other asbestos exposure besides brake work or repair, and 41 of these cases had no other asbestos exposure besides brake work or repair. Our classifications differed significantly from Kelsh et al.
CONCLUSIONS: We discuss how Kelsh et al. methodically reduced the relevant cases by following overly stringent criteria for inclusion. Am. J. Ind. Med. 60:152-162, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
METHODS: We sought to reevaluate the AMSR data ourselves to understand how the company-sponsored research categorized the data.
RESULTS: In our re-analysis of the 78 brake-related folios in the AMSR, we determined that 57 were employed brake mechanics, 35 were employed brake mechanics with no other asbestos exposure besides brake work or repair, and 41 of these cases had no other asbestos exposure besides brake work or repair. Our classifications differed significantly from Kelsh et al.
CONCLUSIONS: We discuss how Kelsh et al. methodically reduced the relevant cases by following overly stringent criteria for inclusion. Am. J. Ind. Med. 60:152-162, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.