MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416774780 · doi:10.1002/art.43446

Exposure to Occupational Inhalants and the Risk of Developing Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2025· article· en· W4416774780 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qianwen Liu, Xin Song, Emily Mauro, Yuan Jiang, Klementy Shchetynsky, PLars Klareskog, Lars Alfredsson, Xia Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRecruitment Program for Young ProfessionalsReumatikerförbundetAFA FörsäkringForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdVetenskapsrådetScience Fund for Creative Research Groups
KeywordsIntoxicative inhalantOccupational exposureRisk assessmentRespiratory HypersensitivityOccupational safety and healthOccupational disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by joint pain, swelling, and stiffness. Although smoking is a well‐established risk factor for RA, the role of occupational inhalants in RA development is less well recognized. This study aimed to systematically review and synthesize existing evidence on the association between occupational inhalants and the risk of developing RA. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to November 20, 2024. Eligible studies were cross‐sectional, were case‐control and cohort designs, were population‐based, reported original data on occupational inhalant exposures and RA, measured exposures, included a comparison group, and used reliable RA ascertainment methods. Studies relying solely on self‐reported RA or focusing on treatment, prognosis, sick leave, or death were excluded. Two reviewers independently conducted literature screening, data extraction, and risk‐of‐bias assessment using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Random‐effects meta‐analyses with relative risk were performed for cohort and case‐control studies, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic. Results In total, 31 studies met inclusion criteria, and 25 were included in meta‐analyses across 10 types of occupational inhalants. Significant associations with RA risk were observed for exposure to silica, asbestos, solvents, pesticides, fertilizers, animal dust, and engine exhaust (relative risks ranging from 1.25 to 1.49). Moderate‐to‐high heterogeneity was observed in seven meta‐analyses. Conclusion Occupational inhalants are associated with increased RA risk, underscoring the importance of workplace prevention strategies and further research into biologic mechanisms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.045
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis & RheumatologySame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207