Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36856971›Full record

ArticlePhotochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology2023

The effects of exposure to solar radiation on human health.

R E Neale, R M Lucas, S N Byrne, L Hollestein, L E Rhodes, S Yazar, A R Young, M Berwick, R A Ireland, C M Olsen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
38.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

R E NealePopulation Health Program, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Rachel.neale@qimrberghofer.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7162-0854
R M LucasNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2736-3541
S N ByrneSchool of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3029-1710
L HollesteinErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8922-6791
L E RhodesDermatology Research Centre, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Salford Royal Hospital, Northern Care Alliance NHS Trust, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9107-6654
S YazarGarvan Medical Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0994-6196
A R YoungKings College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4163-6772
M BerwickUniversity of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5062-2180
R A IrelandSchool of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6073-6149
C M OlsenPopulation Health Program, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4483-1888
The University of Sydney · AUAustralian National University · AUGarvan Institute of Medical Research · AUKing's College London · GBNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation · NLQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AUSalford Royal Hospital · GBThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of New Mexico · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This assessment by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the Montreal Protocol under the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) evaluates the effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation on human health within the context of the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments. We assess work published since our last comprehensive assessment in 2018. Over the last four years gains have been made in knowledge of the links between sun exposure and health outcomes, mechanisms, and estimates of disease burden, including economic impacts. Of particular note, there is new information about the way in which exposure to UV radiation modulates the immune system, causing both harms and benefits for health. The burden of skin cancer remains high, with many lives lost to melanoma and many more people treated for keratinocyte cancer, but it has been estimated that the Montreal Protocol will prevent 11 million cases of melanoma and 432 million cases of keratinocyte cancer that would otherwise have occurred in the United States in people born between 1890 and 2100. While the incidence of skin cancer continues to rise, rates have stabilised in younger populations in some countries. Mortality has also plateaued, partly due to the use of systemic therapies for advanced disease. However, these therapies are very expensive, contributing to the extremely high economic burden of skin cancer, and emphasising the importance and comparative cost-effectiveness of prevention. Photodermatoses, inflammatory skin conditions induced by exposure to UV radiation, can have a marked detrimental impact on the quality of life of sufferers. More information is emerging about their potential link with commonly used drugs, particularly anti-hypertensives. The eyes are also harmed by over-exposure to UV radiation. The incidence of cataract and pterygium is continuing to rise, and there is now evidence of a link between intraocular melanoma and sun exposure. It has been estimated that the Montreal Protocol will prevent 63 million cases of cataract that would otherwise have occurred in the United States in people born between 1890 and 2100. Despite the clearly established harms, exposure to UV radiation also has benefits for human health. While the best recognised benefit is production of vitamin D, beneficial effects mediated by factors other than vitamin D are emerging. For both sun exposure and vitamin D, there is increasingly convincing evidence of a positive role in diseases related to immune function, including both autoimmune diseases and infection. With its influence on the intensity of UV radiation and global warming, the Montreal Protocol has, and will have, both direct and indirect effects on human health, potentially changing the balance of the risks and benefits of spending time outdoors.

Indexed as

CataractMelanomaSkin NeoplasmsHumansQuality of LifeUltraviolet RaysUnited StatesVitamin DVitamin D

Identifiers

PMID36856971
PMCPMC9976694
OpenAlexW4322719113

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.