A Preliminary Study of Observer Exposed Workers and the Relation of Pathology and X-Ray Appearances

Our plain-English summary of A Preliminary Study of Observer Exposed Workers and the Relation of Pathology and X-Ray Appearances, by A. Caplan, J.C. Gilson, K.F. Hinson, et al (1965).

The study

• Authors: A. Caplan, J.C. Gilson, K.F. Hinson, J.C. McVittie, J.C. Wagner
• Published: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences P.379 (1965)
• Type of article: Conference paper
• Our copy: from Johns-Manville's own medical library. The article is still under copyright, so we describe it here rather than post it.

In plain English

This was a preliminary study of how consistently readers classified chest X-rays of asbestos-exposed workers using an extended I.L.O. classification suggested by C. P. Theron. It also set out to compare an agreed classification of the X-rays with what the lungs looked like at autopsy, both to the naked eye and under the microscope. The material was 50 chest X-rays of asbestosis cases from the South African Pneumoconiosis Bureau in Johannesburg, 64 chest X-rays of asbestosis cases from the London Pneumoconiosis Panel, and autopsy reports on 54 cases in the London area. The material was selected to include recent compensation applicants with complete or nearly complete records. Women were excluded, as were cases complicated by tuberculosis, mixed pneumoconioses or other lung fibrosis. The authors stated that lung cancer was so common in the United Kingdom series that excluding those cases was impracticable. Readers in South Africa and in London recorded agreed readings, and all 114 films were then reread. The available text breaks off before saying where or by whom, and it gives no results or conclusions.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Preliminary study of variation between and within X-ray readers in classifying chest radiographs, with comparison of an agreed classification against autopsy pathology. Agreed readings were recorded by Theron and Sluis-Cremer in South Africa and by McVittie, Caplan and Gilson in London, and the whole group of films was then reread.
• Who was studied: 50 chest radiographs of asbestosis cases from the South African Pneumoconiosis Bureau, Johannesburg; 64 chest radiographs of asbestosis cases from the London Pneumoconiosis Panel of the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance; and autopsy reports of 54 cases in the London area. The material was selected to include recent compensation applicants at the two centers with complete or nearly complete records. Women, cases complicated by tuberculosis, and cases of mixed pneumoconioses or other pulmonary fibrosis were excluded.
• Exposure: Asbestos-exposed workers diagnosed with asbestosis. Fiber types, products, jobs and doses are not given in the available text.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • In the United Kingdom series, lung cancer was so common that excluding those cases was impracticable.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Pathology, Chest X-Ray, Autopsy, Pneumoconiosis, Fibrosis, Lung Cancer.

Browse return to medical research.