Occupational respiratory disease in the services industry

Objective. To describe the spectrum and occurrence of occupational exposures of relevance to the respiratory system and their subsequent adverse effects within the service industries and occupations, as outlined by the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2007. ^ Design. Systematic review of the literature from an Ovid search including years 1950 to 2008. Initially, occupational respiratory disease categories were searched, and then combined with each of the different occupations for a comprehensive review of the literature. ^ Results. Ten groups within the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2007 were identified as having exposures leading to occupational respiratory disease. These include janitors/cleaners, dental personnel, cosmetology professionals, traffic police, veterinary personnel, firefighters, healthcare workers, bakers, and bar/restaurant workers. The most common respiratory disorder affecting this population was occupational asthma caused by many different exposures in each occupation. The biggest limitation was the absence of a uniform reporting method for occupational respiratory diseases. ^ Conclusion. There is evidence that there are risks for occupational respiratory disease in the services industry. ^ Key Words: occupational and respiratory disease and service industries ^

Occupational respiratory disease in the services industry

Objective. To describe the spectrum and occurrence of occupational exposures of relevance to the respiratory system and their subsequent adverse effects within the service industries and occupations, as outlined by the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2007. ^ Design. Systematic review of the literature from an Ovid search including years 1950 to 2008. Initially, occupational respiratory disease categories were searched, and then combined with each of the different occupations for a comprehensive review of the literature. ^ Results. Ten groups within the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2007 were identified as having exposures leading to occupational respiratory disease. These include janitors/cleaners, dental personnel, cosmetology professionals, traffic police, veterinary personnel, firefighters, healthcare workers, bakers, and bar/restaurant workers. The most common respiratory disorder affecting this population was occupational asthma caused by many different exposures in each occupation. The biggest limitation was the absence of a uniform reporting method for occupational respiratory diseases. ^ Conclusion. There is evidence that there are risks for occupational respiratory disease in the services industry. ^ Key Words. occupational and respiratory disease and service industries ^

A decade of AIDS literature.

From 1983 through mid-1991, more than 200,000 MEDLINE entries were AIDS-related. Close to 60% of the journals indexed in MEDLINE published at least one article on AIDS during the past ten years. As reflected by a subset of 29,077 MEDLINE records, the literature of AIDS has grown to encompass 29 languages and 65 countries. A bibliometric study of the medical literature helps to demonstrate the progression of AIDS as a world health problem and the concomitant expansion of the research effort underway to control it.

Menu labeling and food choice: A systematic review of the literature concerning the effects of menu labeling on consumer food choices

Objective: To review published literature on the impact of restaurant menu labeling on consumer food choices.^ Method: To examine all relevant studies published on the topic from 2002 to 2012.^ Results: Sixteen studies were identified as relevant and suitable for review. These studies comprised of one systematic review, one health impact assessment, and fourteen research studies conducted at restaurants, cafeterias, and laboratories. Three of ten studies conducted at restaurants and cafeterias and two of four studies conducted at laboratories found positive effects of menu labeling on consumer food choices. Conversely, the systematic review identified for this review found that five out of six studies resulted in weakly positive effects. The health impact assessment estimated positive effects; however, the results of this assessment must be cautiously interpreted since the authors used simulated data.^ Conclusion: Overall, there is insufficient evidence to provide support for the majority of the types of menu labels identified in this review on consumer food choice.^