2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109263
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Environmental exposure to nonylphenol and cancer progression Risk–A systematic review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
33
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
1
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A comprehensive search was conducted on all the available papers from literature reporting on disinfection (inactivation), environmental survival, and control and prevention strategies with a focus on HCoV. We followed the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for SR and Meta-analysis) guidelines for writing of the protocol of the present SR (http://www.prisma-statement.org/Extensions/ InDevelopment.aspx) (Mohamoud et al 2013;Noorimotlagh et al 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A comprehensive search was conducted on all the available papers from literature reporting on disinfection (inactivation), environmental survival, and control and prevention strategies with a focus on HCoV. We followed the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for SR and Meta-analysis) guidelines for writing of the protocol of the present SR (http://www.prisma-statement.org/Extensions/ InDevelopment.aspx) (Mohamoud et al 2013;Noorimotlagh et al 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The present review was conducted over the rearch studies published on immune and bioinformatics identification of T-cell and B-cell epitopes in the protein structure of SARS-CoV-2. In developing our systematic review (SR) protocol, preferred reporting elements for the SR statements, meta-analyses (PRISMA) and guidelines from the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook were used (http://www.prisma-statement.org/ Extensions/InDevelopment.aspx) [9,10], Noorimotlagh et al [11].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MRI is the gold standard to detect pituitary pathology and shows high efficacy in detecting metastatic lesions also [ 18 ], but to perform a whole body scan a strong clinical suspicion of metastatic disease should be present. Although invasiveness is not indicative of malignancy, the evidence of invasion of sphenoid and cavernous sinus on pituitary MRI, should be considered a “red flag” because of a higher risk of developing a PCa [ 19 ], forcing strict, lifelong, follow ups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%