Skip to main content

Table 7 Sensitivity analysis of the association between cumulative respiratory silica exposure and lung function indices using linear regression

From: Dose-response relationship between lung function and chest imaging response to silica exposures in artificial stone manufacturing workers

 

Cumulative RCS exposure (mg/m3 x year)

Weighted tenure (year)

Coefficient

95% C.I.

p value

Coefficient

95% C.I.

p value

Model1

      

FVC, % of prediction

-0.43

(-0.83–0.03)

0.037

-0.11

(-0.26-0.05)

0.188

FEV1, % of prediction

-0.46

(-0.81–0.11)

0.01

-0.13

(-0.27-0.01)

0.059

FEV1/FVC, %

-0.04

(-0.26-0.19)

0.748

-0.04

(-0.12-0.05)

0.403

Model2

      

FVC, % of prediction

-0.4

(-0.80-0.00)

0.051

-0.08

(-0.25-0.09)

0.352

FEV1, % of prediction

-0.43

(-0.77–0.08)

0.016

-0.11

(-0.25-0.04)

0.154

FEV1/FVC, %

-0.03

(-0.26-0.19)

0.788

-0.03

(-0.12-0.06)

0.469

Model3

      

FVC, % of prediction

-0.39

(-0.80-0.02)

0.059

-0.07

(-0.25-0.11)

0.417

FEV1, % of prediction

-0.43

(-0.79–0.08)

0.016

-0.11

(-0.27-0.04)

0.146

FEV1/FVC, %

-0.04

(-0.27-0.19)

0.737

-0.04

(-0.14-0.05)

0.359

Model 4 (Never smokers)

      

FVC, % of prediction

-0.60

(-1.21-0.01)

0.052

-0.05

(-0.31-0.21)

0.709

FEV1, % of prediction

-0.49

(-0.99-0.01)

0.054

-0.12

(-0.33-0.10)

0.272

FEV1/FVC, %

0.06

(-0.27-0.39)

0.722

-0.09

(-0.22-0.05)

0.198

  1. 1. Analyses of Model 1 were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index
  2. 2. Analyses of Model 2 were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, education
  3. 3. Analyses of Model 3 were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, education, current smoking
  4. 4. Analyses of Model 4 only included never smokers and were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, education