4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Protocol for a Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Exposure to Occupational Solar UltraViolet Radiation (UVR) Among Outdoor Workers

      methods-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Solar UltraViolet Radiation (UVR) is considered the most relevant occupational carcinogenic exposure in terms of the number of workers exposed (i.e., outdoor workers) and UVR-induced skin cancers are among the most frequent types of occupational cancers worldwide. This review aims to collect and evaluate all the available preventive interventions conducted on outdoor workers to reduce their solar UVR related risk, with the final purpose of reducing the burden of occupational skin cancers for outdoor workers.

          Methods: We will search the following databases for peer-reviewed original research published: MEDLINE (through PubMed), Scopus, and EMBASE. We will include only interventional studies, both randomized and non-randomized, with an adequate comparison group, therefore excluding cross-sectional studies, as well as case-reports/series, reviews, and letters/comments. The systematic review will adhere to the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. After the literature search, studies to be included will be independently reviewed by two Authors, first based on title and abstract, then based on the full text, according to the inclusion criteria. Conflicts will be solved by a third Author. Two authors will independently extract the required data from included studies and perform quality assessment according to the relevant domain for Risk of Bias assessment proposed by the Cochrane collaboration group. In case of sufficient homogeneity of interventions and outcomes evaluated, results from subgroups of studies will be pooled together in a meta-analysis.

          Discussion: Following the principles for the evaluation of interventions for cancer prevention established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, this systematic review will investigate the effectiveness of the interventions, and consequently it will provide reliable indications for the actual reduction of skin cancer incidence in outdoor workers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

            Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The epidemiology of UV induced skin cancer

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Public Health
                Front Public Health
                Front. Public Health
                Frontiers in Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-2565
                11 November 2021
                2021
                : 9
                : 756566
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena & Reggio Emilia , Modena, Italy
                [2] 2College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences , Dubai, United Arab Emirates
                [3] 3Department of Dermatology, Environmental Medicine and Health Theory, Institute for Health Research and Education, University of Osnabrück , Osnabrück, Germany
                [4] 4Institute for Interdisciplinary Dermatological Prevention and Rehabilitation (iDerm), University of Osnabrück , Osnabrück, Germany
                [5] 5Instituto Salud Global (ISGlobal) , Barcelona, Spain
                [6] 6Department of Biology, Boston College , Chestnut Hill, MA, United States
                [7] 7Institute of Public Health - College of Medicine, United Arab Emirates University , Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
                Author notes

                Edited by: Caterina Ledda, University of Catania, Italy

                Reviewed by: Caradee Wright, South African Medical Research Council, South Africa; Antonino Maniaci, University of Catania, Italy

                *Correspondence: Alberto Modenese alberto.modenese@ 123456unimore.it

                This article was submitted to Occupational Health and Safety, a section of the journal Frontiers in Public Health

                Article
                10.3389/fpubh.2021.756566
                8632259
                34858932
                8cb90c1c-c9c1-4b75-b75f-1a7bd67c042f
                Copyright © 2021 Modenese, Loney, Rocholl, Symanzik, Gobba, John, Straif and Silva Paulo.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 10 August 2021
                : 22 October 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 31, Pages: 7, Words: 5405
                Funding
                Funded by: European Commission, doi 10.13039/501100000780;
                Categories
                Public Health
                Study Protocol

                intervention,occupational exposure,outdoor worker,skin cancer,sun-safety,ultraviolet radiation,workplace-based,systematic review protocol

                Comments

                Comment on this article