Respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation in asphalt workers: Table 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asphalt workers are exposed to bitumen fume and vapour, and to exhaust from engines and passing traffic. AIMS: To assess the occurrence of respiratory symptoms and signs of airflow limitations in a group of asphalt workers. METHODS: All 64 asphalt workers and a reference group of 195 outdoor construction workers from the same company participated in a cross-sectional study. Spirometric tests and a questionnaire on respiratory symptoms and smoking habits were administered. Respiratory symptoms and lung function were adjusted for age and smoking. RESULTS: The FEV1/FVC% ratio was significantly lower in the asphalt workers than in the referents. Symptoms of eye irritation, chest tightness, shortness of breath on exertion, chest wheezing, physician diagnosed asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were all significantly more prevalent among the asphalt workers. CONCLUSION: In asphalt workers there is an increased risk of respiratory symptoms, lung function decline, and COPD compared to other construction workers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".