Adverse health outcome of cosmetologists and hairdressers : a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: The number of cosmetologists and hairdressers is increasing. According to the data of US Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1991, there were more than half million people worked as cosmetologists in America. The number is keeping increasing during decades. In 2008, the number of licensed manicurists has increased by 345%, to more than 393000 since 1991 and the 10-year employment growth of nail technicians is 28%. The booming of cosmetologists leads to many potential health problems. As the occupation which is labor intensive and frequently exposed to cosmetics, the health conditions of cosmetologists and hairdressers should be taken seriously. The frequent exposure of harmful cosmetic ingredients and intensive labor work increase the health risks of cosmetology practitioners. Serious health outcomes are reported by cosmetology practitioners. However their health conditions of is seldom considered in public health policy making due to the low proportion of population. Moreover, the low income level of cosmetology practitioner makes them harder to access qualified healthcare services and insurance. In this case, the study of the health outcome of cosmetology practitioners is needed. \nObjective: The aim of this review is to examine the association between occupation of cosmetologist and different adverse health outcomes. \nMethod: A narrative review is conducted to examine the cosmetology practitioners’ adverse health outcomes, which are adverse pregnancy outcome, loss of fertility, cancer, diabetes and certain kind of physical disorders. This review identified 20 researches for further analysis, in the identified studies, 9 from North America (1 from Canada and 8 from USA), 9 from EU, 1 from Asia (Taiwan) and 1 from Africa (Egypt). The reference groups are people from other professionals and average prevalence in the whole population. \nResult: Serious health outcomes are reported by cosmetology practitioners. The adverse pregnancy outcome was reported by 13 studies. The occupation of cosmetologists would not only affect pregnant cosmetologists, but also their children. Spontaneous abortion, SGA (small for gestational age) and stunted development for children were mainly reported as adverse health outcomes of fetus and children. One of those 13 studies had examined the cohort from two different period of time, and found out that the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes were decreasing over time due to the development of technology and regulation. The loss in fertility (n=2), diabetes (n=1), cancer (n=3) and physical disorders (n=3) were also significantly associated with the occupation of cosmetology practitioners. Two studies examined the loss in fertility of cosmetology practitioners; one study from Sweden indicated a higher risk of conceiving failure among cosmetologists, while one study from UK indicated a no significant association of premature ovarian failure. One study from USA found out a higher prevalence of gestational diabetes among manicurists and cosmetologists. 3 studies were about the health outcome of cancer, all those three studies indicted significant associations. 3 researchers studied the health outcome of physical disorders; one study from Egypt indicated a significant association of elbow, shoulder, back and knee pain, especially among old and male cosmetologists. However, other two studies indicated no significant association. \nConclusion and implication: the review of adverse health outcomes of cosmetology practitioners indicated that cosmetologists have higher risks of adverse pregnancy outcome, loss of fertility, cancer, diabetes and certain kind of physical disorders, in comparison with people from other professionals. In order to improve the health condition of cosmetology practitioners, Restrict occupational performance regulation and guidelines, policy supports for cosmetologists and hairdressers, and comprehensive health education and information will be helpful for the health promotion for cosmetology practitioners and common people who contact with cosmetic products frequently.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,035 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».