Effects of occupational aluminum exposure, types of alcohol consumption, and their interaction on cognitive function of workers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundOccupational aluminum exposure is closely related to cognitive impairment, and alcohol consumption is also closely related to cognitive dysfunction.ObjectiveTo explore the effects of types of alcohol consumption on cognitive function of occupational aluminum exposed workers.MethodsA total of 181 workers aged from 23 to 56 years were selected by cluster sampling method in an electrolytic aluminum workshop of an aluminum plant in a region and in a maintenance workshop of another plant in the same region from July to August, 2019. Venous blood was collected, and plasma aluminum concentration was determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. The study subjects were divided into low and high exposure groups based on the median blood aluminum level and type of work. Their basic information was collected by occupational health examination. Workers' cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale-Beijing Edition. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association between plasma aluminum concentration and cognitive impairment, and between the types of alcohol consumption (including Baijiu, red wine, and beer) and cognitive impairment, Unconditional logistic regression was used to fit multiplicative interaction model as well as additive interaction model of plasma aluminum concentration and the types of alcohol consumption, and to calculate the relative excess relative risk due to interaction (RERI) and attributable proportion due to interaction (AP).ResultsThe M (P25, P75) concentrations of plasma aluminum were 40.01 (25.05, 60.56) µg·L−1 in the total study subjects, 25.16 (17.13, 34.78) µg·L−1 in the low exposure group and 60.56 (47.40, 68.53) µg·L−1 in the high exposure group. After adjusting the type of alcohol consumption, drinking, age, duration of exposure to aluminum, education, marital status, and smoking, the odds ratios for impairments of attention, language expression, and overall cognitive function in the high exposure group were 4.295 (95%CI: 1.912-9.648), 5.687 (95%CI: 1.355-23.867), and 2.720 (95%CI: 1.225-6.040) times of the low exposure group respectively. Besides, after adjusting blood aluminum concentration, total alcohol consumption, age, duration of exposure to aluminum, education, marital status, and smoking, the risk of attention impairment of the Baijiu drinkers was 2.613 (95%CI: 1.054 to 6.837) times of the non-Baijiu drinkers; the risks of impairment of visuospatial abilities and execution functions, language expression, delayed recall, and overall cognitive function of the beer drinkers were 3.165 (95%CI: 1.285-7.797), 17.898 (95%CI: 1.590-201.480), 3.118 (95%CI: 1.215-8.003), and 3.824 (95%CI: 1.736-8.423) times of the non-beer drinkers. There were both additive [RERI (95%CI): 1.745 (1.394-2.097), AP (95%CI): 0.415 (0.201-0.630)] and multiplicative (OR=3.591, 95%CI: 1.393-9.255) interactions between Baijiu intake and plasma aluminum concentration levels on the attention domain. The cognitive impairment attributed to the interactive effects of drinking Baijiu and plasma aluminum concentration in individuals with attention impairment accounted for 41.5%. There were both additive [RERI (95%CI): 5.955 (0.562-11.328), AP (95%CI): 0.829 (0.577-1.081)] and multiplicative (OR=42.174, 95%CI: 5.469-325.252) interactions between beer drinking and plasma aluminum concentration on the overall cognitive function. Among the individuals with overall cognitive impairment, the cognitive impairment caused by the interaction of beer drinking and plasma aluminum concentration accounted for 82.9%.ConclusionOccupation aluminum exposed workers' attention, language expression, and overall cognitive function are closely related to their plasma aluminum concentration. Plasma aluminum concentrations have interactions with Baijiu and beer consumption on cognitive impairment of workers.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 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) | 0,001 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».