An exploratory quantitative risk assessment for high molecular weight sensitizers: wheat flour
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Quantitative risk assessments have been made for wheat dust and allergen exposure and wheat sensitization using classical epidemiological approaches based on simple categorizations in exposure groups. Such analyses suggest the existence of an exposure threshold level for wheat specific sensitization and were used as input in recently conducted risk assessments for wheat flour by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists and the Dutch Expert Committee on Occupational Standards. More advanced statistical analyses were applied using generalized additive modeling and smoothed plots to evaluate the shape of the exposure response relationship in greater detail and evaluate the presence of exposure thresholds. METHODS: Data were used from a recently conducted epidemiological study in bakery workers. Information was available on wheat sensitization (IgE antibodies), inhalable dust levels and wheat allergen levels. Initial analyses were based on simple exposure categorizations for inhalable dust and allergen exposure. A more detailed analysis using non-parametric generalized additive models (GAM models) and smoothing plots allowed inspection of the presence of an exposure threshold of evaluation of 'no' or 'lowest observed effect levels' (NOELs, LOELs) using exposure data on the individual level. RESULTS: All analyses showed an increasing sensitization risk with increasing exposure. The classical epidemiological analyses gave evidence for the existence of an exposure threshold or 'no observed effect level (NOEL)' for specific wheat sensitization between 0.5 and 1 mg/m3 of inhalable dust. The more advanced analyses did not suggest any evidence for the existence of an exposure threshold. However, estimates of a LOEL obtained by considering an arbitrary increase in sensitization risk between 1.5 and 2 as undesirable, were close to the NOEL from the classical analyses and would therefore not lead to an essentially different exposure limit. The criterion of an increase in wheat sensitization risk was based on the risk in non-wheat dust exposed populations. CONCLUSION: Exposure response modeling using different classical epidemiological approaches and advanced statistical methods resulted in health based LOEL or NOEL estimates within a relatively close range. But when sensitization accompanied by asthma or rhinitis symptoms was considered as critical endpoint, steeper exposure-response relationships were observed which would lead to lower LOEL values.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle