MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1579045169 · doi:10.1002/ajim.22200

Estimating occupational exposure to carcinogens in Quebec

2013· article· en· W1579045169 on OpenAlexafffundabout
France Labrèche, Patrice Duguay, Claude Ostiguy, Alexandre Boucher, Brigitte Roberge, Cheryl Peters, Paul A. Demers

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsCancer Care OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
FundersHealth CanadaPartenariat Canadien Contre Le Cancer
KeywordsInternational agencyEnvironmental healthMedicineOccupational exposureOccupational cancerCarcinogenOccupational medicineToxicologyExposure assessmentPopulationCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We estimated the extent of exposure to occupational carcinogens in Quebec, Canada, to help raise awareness of occupational cancers. METHODS: Proportions of workers exposed to 21 recognized and 17 probable carcinogens (according to Quebec occupational health regulation and the International Agency for Research on Cancer [IARC] classification) were extracted from various sources: workplace monitoring data, research projects, a population survey, radiation protection data, exposure estimates from the Carcinogen Exposure Canada (CAREX Canada) Project database, and published exposure data. These proportions were applied to Quebec labor force data. RESULTS: Among the 38 studied, carcinogens with the largest proportions of exposed workers were solar radiation (6.6% of workers), night shift work/rotating shift work including nights (6.0%), diesel exhaust fumes (4.4%), wood dust (2.9%) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (2.0%). More than 15 carcinogens were identified in several industrial sectors, and up to 100,000 young workers are employed in these sectors. CONCLUSION: Although crude, estimates obtained with different data sources allow identification of research and intervention priorities for cancer in Quebec.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial MedicineSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207