Background: Lung cancer is a cancer whose incidence increases every year and is the number one cancer cause of death in the world. One of the causes of lung cancer comes from occupational exposure in the form of asbestos dust and silica. This study aims to analyze the effect of exposure to asbestos and silica dust on the incidence of lung cancer in the working community.Subjects and Method: This study is a meta-analysis with the following PICO, population: working society. Intervention: exposure to asbestos dust and silica dust. Comparison: not exposed to asbestos dust and silica dust. Result: lung cancer. The articles used in this study were obtained from three databases, namely Google Scholar, Pubmed, and Science Direct. The keywords to search for articles were “dust exposure” OR “silica dust exposure” OR “asbestos dust exposure” OR “occupational dust exposure” AND “lung cancer”. The articles included are full-text English with a case-control study design from 2007 to 2022. The articles were selected using PRISMA flow diagrams. Articles were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 application.Results: A total of 14 case-control studies from continental Europe, America and Asia were selected for systematic review and meta-analysis. Based on 8 studies on the effect of exposure to asbestos dust on the incidence of lung cancer, the incidence of lung cancer increased 1.57 times compared to workers who were not exposed to asbestos dust (aOR= 1.57; 95% CI= 1.20 to 2.06; p= 0.001) and 9 case-control studies on the effect of exposure to silica dust showed an increase of 1.31 times the incidence of lung cancer compared to workers who were not exposed to silica dust (aOR = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.25 to 1.38; p<0.001).Conclusion: Exposure to asbestos and silica dust increases the incidence of lung cancer in workers. Keywords: asbestos, silica, occupational dust exposure, lung cancer. Correspondence:Aurina Firda Kusuma Wardani. Masters Program in Public Health, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A, Surakarta 57126, Central Java, Indonesia. Mobile: +6282135012135. Email: firdakw@gmail.com.
Background: Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers and the most common cause of death in women worldwide. Health Belief Model is a theoretical model that explains the influence of beliefs on a person's health behavior, including cervical cancer prevention behavior. This study aims to determine the effect of the HBM construct on cervical cancer screening behavior among women of childbearing age based on a primary study conducted by previous researchers. Subjects and Method:This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis with PICO as follows: Population: women of reproductive age, Intervention: HBM constructs of high perceived severity and high self-efficacy. Comparison: low perceived severity and low self-efficacy. Outcome: cervical cancer screening. The articles used in this study were taken from several databases, namely Google Scholar, Pubmed, SpringerLink, Scopus, and SAGE. The keywords used for the search were "Health Belief Model" AND "Cervical Cancer Screening" OR "Cervical Cancer Test" OR "Pap Smear" OR "Papanicolaou Test" OR "VIA Test" OR "Visual Inspection Acetic-Acid" AND "Adjusted Odds Ratio" OR aOR. Inclusion criteria were full-text articles in English and Indonesian with a crosssectional study design, population of women of childbearing age, and cervical cancer screening as an outcome, analyzed multivariately by including adjusted Odds Ratio/aOR. Articles were selected using the PRISMA flow diagram and analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 application. Results: A total of 7 cross-sectional studies from Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia were reviewed and meta-analyzed. The results showed that women of childbearing age with high perceived severity were 1.61 times more likely to have cervical cancer screening than those with low perceived severity (aOR = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.34; p = 0.01). The data also showed that women of childbearing age with high self-efficacy were 5.91 times more likely to undergo cervical cancer screening than women with low self-efficacy (aOR= 5.91; 95% CI= 3.25 to 10.75; p<0.001). Conclusion: Severity perception and self-efficacy are predictors for tertiary prevention of type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Background: Breastmilk is the main source of nutrition for babies who cannot eat solid food until they are 6 months old. Exclusive breastfeeding education can be given as long as pregnant women make antenatal care visits. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between antenatal care visits and exclusive breastfeeding. Subjects and Method: This study was a meta-analysis with the following PICO, population: mothers. Intervention: antenatal care visits. Comparison: no Antenatal Care visits. Result: Exclusive breastfeeding. The articles used in this study were obtained from three databases, namely Google Scholar, Pubmed, and Science Direct. Keywords to search for articles are "Antenatal Care Attendance" or "Antenatal Care Visit" or "Prenatal Care" and "Exclusive Breastfeeding" or "exclusively breastfed". Included articles are full-text English with a cohort study design from 2010 to 2021 and report on adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) in multivariate analysis. Article selection is done by using PRISMA flow diagram. Articles were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 application. Results: A total of 9 cross-sectional studies involving 19,716 mothers from Africa, Europe, and Asia were selected for systematic review and meta-analysis. The data collected showed that mothers who had antenatal care visits increased 1.50 times for exclusive breastfeeding compared to mothers who did not visit antenatal care (aOR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.18 to 1.89); (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Antenatal care visits increase exclusive breastfeeding.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.