O'Connor et al. systematic review regarding animal feeding operations and public health: Critical flaws may compromise conclusions

Keeve E. Nachman, Juleen Lam, Leah H. Schinasi, Tara C. Smith, Beth J. Feingold, Joan A. Casey

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

Abstract

In this comment, we summarize several scientific concerns with the recently published systematic review from O'Connor and colleagues that examined the relationship between proximity to animal-feeding operations and health of individuals in nearby communities. The authors utilized a bias tool not designed for environmental health research, erroneously excluded important studies, and incorrectly interpreted others. As a result, the conclusions drawn in the review misrepresent the evidence from the published literature, limiting its value to policymakers, researchers, and the public.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number179
JournalSystematic reviews
Volume6
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 31 2017

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'O'Connor et al. systematic review regarding animal feeding operations and public health: Critical flaws may compromise conclusions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this