Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38878249›Full record

ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2024

Bioaerosol Exposures and Respiratory Diseases in Cannabis Workers.

Tess Eidem, Tara Nordgren, Mark Hernandez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

3 authors.

Tess EidemDepartment of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309-0428, US. tess.eidem@colorado.edu.
Tara NordgrenDepartment of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80523-1601, US.
Mark HernandezDepartment of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309-0428, US.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review investigates occupational inhalation hazards associated with biologically derived airborne particles (bioaerosols) generated in indoor cannabis cultivation and manufacturing facilities. RECENT

findingsIndoor cannabis production is growing across the US as are recent reports of respiratory diseases among cannabis workers, including occupational asthma morbidity and mortality. More information is needed to understand how bioaerosol exposure in cannabis facilities impacts worker health and occupational disease risk. Preliminary studies demonstrate a significant fraction of airborne particles in cannabis facilities are comprised of fungal spores, bacteria, and plant material, which may also contain hazardous microbial metabolites and allergens. These bioaerosols may pose pathogenic, allergenic, toxigenic, and pro-inflammatory risks to workers. The absence of multi-level, holistic bioaerosol research in cannabis work environments necessitates further characterization of the potential respiratory hazards and effective risk prevention methods to safeguard occupational health as the cannabis industry continues to expand across the US and beyond.

Indexed as

AerosolsCannabisOccupational ExposureAir Pollutants, OccupationalHumansOccupational DiseasesRespiratory Tract DiseasesAerosolsAir Pollutants, OccupationalAeroallergensBioaerosolsCannabis Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA)Cannabis ManufacturingMicrobial Inhalation HazardsOccupational Respiratory Exposure

Identifiers

PMID38878249
PMCPMC11233357

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.