MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968088873 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2015.1009987

Exposure to Crystalline Silica at Alberta Work Sites: Review of Controls

2015· article· en· W1968088873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diane Radnoff, Maria S. Todor, Jeremy Beach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHousekeepingRespiratorOccupational exposureEnvironmental healthWork (physics)MedicinePersonal protective equipmentExposure assessmentControl (management)ToxicologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)EngineeringComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 2009 to 2013, Alberta Jobs, Skills, Training, and Labour (JSTL) conducted a project to evaluate exposure to crystalline silica and assess controls to protect workers. Information on exposure results has been previously reported; this article discusses the data collected on workplace controls. Information on work site controls was collected during exposure assessments consisting of qualitative information on controls in place and used by workers at the time of the assessments. Where there was sufficient data, the information was further analyzed to evaluate the impact of a particular control. While many types of controls were observed, they were not always effective or in use. The control available most often was respiratory protective equipment (RPE). Generally, when respirators were used, they were correctly selected for the level of measured exposure. However, not all workers who were potentially overexposed wore respirators at the time of the assessments. When the use of respirators was taken into account, about one-third of workers were still potentially exposed over the Alberta occupational exposure limit. The industries with the highest levels of exposure tended to be those with the most unprotected workers. Issues were identified with the use of improper work practices such as dry cleaning methods, lack of documented work procedures, poor housekeeping, and lack of training which may have contributed to worker exposure levels. There is a wide range in the efficacy of controls, particularly engineering controls. Most of the literature focuses on engineering controls; however administrative controls also play a role in reducing worker exposure. Data collected in this work indicated that simple changes to work procedures and behavior (such as improved housekeeping) may be effective, low-cost ways to reduce workplace exposure. More study is required to evaluate the impact and efficacy of administrative controls such as housekeeping and training. Employers must select and evaluate controls in the context of overall workplace health and safety programs and ensure that they are supported by supervision, good work practices. and training.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207