Workers in the U.S. and Worldwide: "An Endangered Species?" and Updates in Occupational and Environmental Medicine
 

Friday, March 6, 2026 — Poster Session

Important Dates

Milestone Date
Abstract Submission Opens Monday, November 10, 2025
Abstract Submission & COI Due Friday, January 9, 2026
Notification of Acceptance Friday, January 16, 2026
Poster Draft Due for Review Monday, February 23, 2026
Poster Review February 23–27, 2026
Live Session Friday, March 6, 2026

 

Overview

We are pleased to announce an in-person poster abstract session as part of the UCSF conference, Workers in the U.S. and Worldwide: “An Endangered Species?” and Updates in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, which will take place Friday, March 6, 2026, at the San Francisco Marriott Fisherman’s Wharf Hotel.

We invite abstracts addressing original research (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods), pilot data, meta-analyses, policy assessments, and case reports relevant to occupational or environmental health and safety.

Topics may include, but are not limited to:

  • Novel or emerging workplace exposures
  • Classic occupational toxicants
  • Occupational lung diseases and environmental respiratory health
  • Musculoskeletal and repetitive strain injuries
  • Infectious and climate-related health effects
  • Environmental justice and health disparities
  • Interventions and policy initiatives

Abstract Preparation

  • Length: Maximum of 500 words (excluding title and authors).
  • Format: Microsoft Word document (not PDF), single-spaced, Arial 11-point font, 1-inch margins.
  • Structure: Subheadings such as Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions may be used but are not required.
  • Disclosure: Include relevant funding and any conflicts of interest.
  • References: Not required.

Title, Authors, and Institutions

  • Begin the title flush left; avoid abbreviations.
  • Capitalize only the first word and proper nouns.
  • List authors as: Last name, First M. I. (omit degrees/titles).
  • Use an asterisk (*) to indicate the presenting author.
  • Provide institutional affiliations (institution, city, state/province, country).

Submission Instructions

  • Submit your abstract and completed cover form as a single editable Word file to: sheiphali.gandhi@ucsf.edu AND mmeyer@berkeley.edu.
  • Use the subject line: “Occupational Abstract Submission.”
  • All submissions must include a completed Conflict of Interest (COI) form using the following link: https://berkeleysph.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9Tv6f88PkgUMUtw 
  • If you do not receive a confirmation within 4 business days, please email Michelle Beltran at mmeyer@berkeley.edu.
  • Authors of accepted abstracts will receive detailed information on poster specifications and presentation format.
  • All accepted posters must be submitted by February 23, 2026, for advance review to ensure compliance with conflict-of-interest requirements.

**Note: Submitting an abstract does not constitute registration for the conference.

 

Abstract Submission Cover Form

TITLE OF ABSTRACT:
PRESENTING AUTHOR (Full Name):
ACADEMIC OR OCCUPATIONAL TITLE:
INSTITUTION:
CONTACT EMAIL:
CONTACT ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE (including country code):

(Provide the abstract text on a separate new page per above instructions.)

 

Example Abstract

The impact of occupational exposures on the risk of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis – a systematic review and meta-analysis

Gandhi SA1*, Min B2, Johannson KA2, Steinmaus C3, Reynolds CJ4, Cummings KJ5

1 Division of Occupational, Environmental, and Climate Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
2 Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
3 School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
4 Faculty of Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College of London, London, England, UK
5 Occupational Health Branch, California Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA, USA

Background
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive fibrotic pulmonary disorder of unknown etiology, characterized by a usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern. Previous meta-analyses have reported associations between occupational exposures and IPF, but higher-quality studies have been published in recent years, doubling the number of studied patients. The primary objective of the current study is to provide a contemporary and comprehensive assessment of the relationship between occupational exposures and IPF.

Methods
We searched Embase and Web of Science through September 2021 and PubMed through October 2022 to identify all publications on occupational exposure and IPF. We conducted a meta-analysis of the occupational burden, odds ratio, and population-attributable fraction (PAF) of exposures. Five exposure categories were analyzed: VGDF (vapors, gases, dusts, and fumes), metal dust, wood dust, silica dust, and agricultural dust. A comprehensive bias assessment was performed. The study protocol was registered to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42021267808).

Results
Our search identified 17,937 publications. Fifteen publications contained relative risks needed to calculate pooled ORs and PAFs, and 11 additional publications reported an occupational burden within a case series. The proportion of cases with occupational exposures to VGDF was 45% [95% confidence interval (CI), 35-56], with a range of 8-17% within more specific exposure categories. The pooled OR was elevated for VGDF at 1.9 (CI, 1.4-2.6), with a pooled PAF of 24% (CI, 16-32). The pooled OR and PAF within specific exposure categories ranged from 1.6-1.8 and 4-14%, respectively. We identified some publication bias, though it was not sufficient to diminish the association between occupational exposures and IPF based on sensitivity analysis and bias assessment.

Conclusions
Our findings suggest that occupational exposures contribute to nearly 1 in 4 cases of IPF based upon a PAF of 24% (alongside a pooled odds ratio of 1.9). Additionally, 45% of patients with IPF report occupational exposure to VGDF. This meta-analysis provides robust evidence that a considerable number of cases of IPF are attributable to inhaled occupational exposures and warrant increased consideration in clinical care and prevention efforts.