Under‐reporting of compensable mesothelioma in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When combined with a history of occupational asbestos exposure, mesothelioma is often presumed work-related. In Canada, workers diagnosed with mesothelioma caused by occupational asbestos exposure are often eligible for compensation under provincial workers' compensation boards. Although occupational asbestos exposure causes the majority of mesothelioma, Canadian research suggests less than half of workers actually apply for compensation. Alberta's mandatory reporting requirements may produce higher filing rates but this is currently unknown. This study evaluates Alberta's mesothelioma filing and compensation rates. METHODS: Demographic information on all mesothelioma patients diagnosed between 1980 and 2004 were extracted from the Alberta Cancer Board's Cancer Registry and linked to Workers' Compensation Board of Alberta claims data. RESULTS: Alberta recorded a total of 568 histologically confirmed mesothelioma cases between 1980 and 2004. Forty-two percent of cases filed a claim; 83% of filed claims were accepted for compensation. CONCLUSIONS: Patient under-reporting of compensable mesothelioma is a problem and raises larger questions regarding under-reporting of other asbestos-related cancers in Alberta. Strategies should focus on increasing filing rates where appropriate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".