Prostate cancer and occupational exposure to whole‐body vibration in a national population‐based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Following preliminary evidence from observational studies, we test the potential relationship between whole-body vibration (WBV) and prostate cancer in a cohort study. METHODS: WBV exposure was assigned based on occupation in 1991 and 1,107,700 participants were followed for incident prostate cancer until the end of 2003. Adjusted hazard rate ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: 17,922 incident prostate cancer cases were observed. WBV-exposed men in Natural and Applied Sciences Occupations had a 37% elevated risk of prostate cancer (95% CI 1.09-1.72) and WBV-exposed men in Trades, Transport, and Equipment Operators Occupations had a 9% reduced risk (95% CI 0.86-0.97). Independent of WBV exposure, small but significant differences in risk were seen for several occupational categories. CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent relationship between WBV and prostate cancer. Further research could focus on other exposures or specific occupations in the studied categories to determine what may be contributing to the observed differences in prostate cancer risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".