Methodological and Practical Challenges in Synthesizing Occupational Cancer Studies

Soyeon Ahn (), Laura A. McClure, Paulo S. Pinheiro, Diana Hernandez, Devina J. Boga, Henna Ukani, Jennifer V. Chavez, Jorge A. Quintela Fernandez, Alberto J. Caban-Martinez, Erin Kobetz and David J. Lee
Additional contact information
Soyeon Ahn: Department of Educational and Psychological Studies, School of Education and Human Development, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
Laura A. McClure: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Paulo S. Pinheiro: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Diana Hernandez: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Devina J. Boga: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Henna Ukani: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Jennifer V. Chavez: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Jorge A. Quintela Fernandez: University of Miami Libraries, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
Alberto J. Caban-Martinez: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
Erin Kobetz: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA
David J. Lee: Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33101, USA

IJERPH, 2024, vol. 21, issue 6, 1-12

Abstract: Studies examining occupational exposures and cancer risk frequently report mixed findings; it is thus imperative for researchers to synthesize study results and identify any potential sources that explain such variabilities in study findings. However, when synthesizing study results using meta-analytic techniques, researchers often encounter a number of practical and methodological challenges. These challenges include (1) an incomparability of effect size measures due to large variations in research methodology; (2) a violation of the independence assumption for meta-analysis; (3) a violation of the normality assumption of effect size measures; and (4) a variation in cancer definitions across studies and changes in coding standards over time. In this paper, we first demonstrate these challenges by providing examples from a real dataset collected for a large meta-analysis project that synthesizes cancer mortality and incidence rates among firefighters. We summarize how each of these challenges has been handled in our meta-analysis. We conclude this paper by providing practical guidelines for handling challenges when synthesizing study findings from occupational cancer literature.

Keywords: meta-analysis; cancer studies; mortality; incidence; ICD code (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/6/742/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/6/742/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:6:p:742-:d:1410147

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().