Exposure to Crystalline Silica at Alberta Work Sites: Review of Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".