Occupational exposure to crystalline silica and the risk of lung cancer in Canadian men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crystalline silica is a recognized carcinogen, but the association with lung cancer at lower levels of exposure has not been well characterized. This study investigated the relationship between occupational silica exposure and lung cancer and the combined effects of cigarette smoking and silica exposure on lung cancer risk. A population-based case-control study was conducted in eight Canadian provinces between 1994 and 1997. Self-reported questionnaires were used to obtain a lifetime occupational history and information on other risk factors. Occupational hygienists assigned silica exposures to each job based on concentration, frequency and reliability. Data from 1681 incident lung cancer cases and 2053 controls were analyzed using logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Models included adjustments for cigarette smoking, lifetime residential second-hand smoke and occupational exposure to diesel and gasoline engine emissions. Relative to the unexposed, increasing duration of silica exposure at any concentration was associated with a significant trend in lung cancer risk (OR ≥ 30 years: 1.67, 1.21-2.24; ptrend = 0.002). The highest tertile of cumulative silica exposure was associated with lung cancer (OR = 1.81, 1.34-2.42; ptrend = 0.004) relative to the lowest. Men exposed to silica for ≥30 years with ≥40 cigarette pack-years had the highest risk relative to those unexposed with <10 pack-years (OR = 42.53, 23.54-76.83). The joint relationship with smoking was consistent with a multiplicative model. Our findings suggest that occupational exposure to silica is a risk factor for lung cancer, independently from active and passive smoking, as well as from exposure to other lung carcinogens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".