Skip to main content

Table 2 Tuberculosis risk or odds by silicosis relative to no silicosis or general population

From: The association between silica exposure, silicosis and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

First author,
year of publication
Study
Design
Study /control
population(s)
N Controlling for Estimate (95% CI)
(silicosis vs no silicosis)
Low or intermediate TB burden countries
 Westerholm 1986 [46] Cohort Mining, quarrying
and tunneling
industries and iron and steel foundries.
1522 Occupation, age, calendar year at first silica exposure. OR 32.99
(4.50, 241.58) a
 Sherson 1990 [47] Cohort Foundry workers,
general population
5579 (i)None
(ii)Age
(i) RR 8.25 (2.81, 24.25) b
(ii) SIR 10.00 (2.72, 25.61)
 Chang 2001 [52] Cohort Silicosis register /
general population
707 Age,
gender
SIR 4.9 c
 Li 2011 [53] Cohort End-stage renal
disease patients
49,983 Age, gender,
income,COPD
HR 5.82 (2.17, 15.6)
 Yarahmadi 2013 [54] Case control Community   None OR 4.08 (2.63, 3.62)
High TB burden countries
 Cowie 1994 [48] Cohort Gold miners 1153 Age, date of CXR RR 2.8 (1.9, 4.1)
 Hnizdo 1998 [49] Cohort Gold miners 2255 Age, smoking, cumulative dust exposure RR 4.18 (2.75, 6.36)
 Corbett 1999 [50] Case control Gold miners 561 Age, HIV, duration, employed, dusty job OR 4.90 (2.32,10.58)
 Corbett 2000 [51] Cohort Gold miners 4022 Age, HIV, duration employed, surface/underground RR 2.2 (1.3, 3.7) d
  1. CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio, RR relative risk, rate ratio or risk ratio (see Table 1); SIR, standardised incidence ratio; HR, hazard ratio;
  2. CXR, chest x-ray
  3. a Estimated for this review
  4. b (i) RR and CI estimated for this review comparing silicotics with non-silicotics in the same cohort; (ii) indirect standardization using general population control, presented here with base 1 rather than 100
  5. c No CI provided
  6. d OR for silicosis > 1/1 not provided. OR for ILO 1/1 used as proxy