MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965835167 · doi:10.1080/15459620500340822

Occupational Exposure Limits: An Approach and Calculation Aid for Extended Work Schedule Adjustments

2005· article· en· W1965835167 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas W. Armstrong, Daniel J. Caldwell, Dave K. Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork scheduleOccupational exposure limitToxicantWork (physics)Occupational exposureLimit (mathematics)ToxicokineticsComputer scienceReliability engineeringToxicologyOperations researchPharmacokineticsEngineeringChemistryPharmacologyMedicineMathematicsToxicityBiologyEnvironmental healthMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past reviews of occupational exposure limit (OEL) adjustments have covered both decision logic and calculation methods to derive factors to assure protection of workers on extended (also known as unusual) work shifts. The approaches reviewed included several Haber's rule based methods, several variants of single compartment toxicokinetic (TK) models, and physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling. These models calculate OEL adjustment factors based on the work shift and the uptake and elimination of the toxicant. A key parameter of the TK models is the biologic half-life of the toxicant, but reliable data for the half-life are not available for all substances of concern. A spreadsheet is presented that implements TK calculations, with one of the presented TK calculation alternatives not dependent on half-life data. This half-life data independent approach is suggested as a viable option for situations when the toxicant's half-life is unknown or uncertain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.010

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207