An Official ATS Proceedings: Asthma in the Workplace: The Third Jack Pepys Workshop on Asthma in the Workplace: Answered and Unanswered Questions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Third Jack Pepys Workshop on Asthma in the Workplace held in Montreal, Canada in May 2007 focused on emerging data, including progress over the previous three years touching on questions identified at a previous Workshop (2004). The format, based on that used in previous workshops, consisted primarily of short, thematic, structured slide presentations followed by extensive, open-ended discussion periods. The key summary content of the workshops discussions has been distilled for this account. (Expanded details of the prepared presentations in PowerPoint format can be found at: www.asthma-workplace.com.) The topics reflect an expanded scope of interest including consideration of: (1) work-related asthma (WRA), subsuming both occupational asthma (OA) and work-exacerbated asthma (WEA); although the latter condition is commoner than OA, discussion mainly focused on OA because the corpus of scientific literature is larger; (2) other related occupational airway pathologic processes, beyond WRA, including rhinitis and eosinophilic bronchitis, with focus on various methods that improve objective confirmation of these conditions; (3) the psycho-socioeconomic impact of WRA with presentation of questionnaires that assess disability due to OA; (4) development of a world-wide perspective on work-related airway disease, including the situation in countries with emerging economies where the frequency of WRA is likely similar to or even greater than that in developed countries. The overarching conclusion was that WRA and related airway conditions are underrecognized and underdiagnosed both in developed and developing countries, with a great many aspects related to personal and environmental risk, exposure, mechanisms, and assessment of impairment/disability remaining to explore to better inform primary, secondary, and tertiary disease prevention.
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 | 0.018 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.018 |
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".