MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988247616 · doi:10.1039/c1em10628g

Modelling of occupational respirable crystalline silica exposure for quantitative exposure assessment in community-based case-control studies

2011· article· en· W1988247616 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susan Peters, Roel Vermeulen, Lützen Portengen, Ann Olsson, Benjamin Kendzia, R. J. Vincent, Barbara Savary, Jérôme Lavoué, Domenico Maria Cavallo, Andrea Cattaneo, Dario Mirabelli, Nils Plato, Joëlle Févotte, Beate Pesch, Thomas Brüning, Kurt Straíf, Hans Kromhout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Monitoring · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExposure assessmentJob-exposure matrixEnvironmental scienceOccupational exposureDuration (music)Exposure durationRandom effects modelStatisticsSampling (signal processing)Environmental healthAnimal scienceToxicologyMathematicsMedicineEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an empirical model for exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) to create a quantitative job-exposure matrix (JEM) for community-based studies. Personal measurements of exposure to RCS from Europe and Canada were obtained for exposure modelling. A mixed-effects model was elaborated, with region/country and job titles as random effect terms. The fixed effect terms included year of measurement, measurement strategy (representative or worst-case), sampling duration (minutes) and a priori exposure intensity rating for each job from an independently developed JEM (none, low, high). 23,640 personal RCS exposure measurements, covering a time period from 1976 to 2009, were available for modelling. The model indicated an overall downward time trend in RCS exposure levels of -6% per year. Exposure levels were higher in the UK and Canada, and lower in Northern Europe and Germany. Worst-case sampling was associated with higher reported exposure levels and an increase in sampling duration was associated with lower reported exposure levels. Highest predicted RCS exposure levels in the reference year (1998) were for chimney bricklayers (geometric mean 0.11 mg m(-3)), monument carvers and other stone cutters and carvers (0.10 mg m(-3)). The resulting model enables us to predict time-, job-, and region/country-specific exposure levels of RCS. These predictions will be used in the SYNERGY study, an ongoing pooled multinational community-based case-control study on lung cancer.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations65
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental MonitoringSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207