Cancer Mortality in Workers Exposed to Organochlorine Compounds in thePulp and Paper Industry: An International Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate cancer mortality in pulp and paper industry workers exposed to chlorinated organic compounds. We assembled a multinational cohort of workers employed between 1920 and 1996 in 11 countries. Exposure to both volatile and nonvolatile organochlorine compounds was estimated at the department level using an exposure matrix. We conducted a standardized mortality ratio (SMR) analysis based on age and calendar-period-specific national mortality rates and a Poisson regression analysis. The study population consisted of 60,468 workers. Workers exposed to volatile organochlorines experienced a deficit of all-cause [SMR = 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89-0.93] and all-cancer (SMR = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.97) mortality, with no evidence of increased risks for any cancer of a priori interest. There was a weak, but statistically significant, trend of increasing risk of all-cancer mortality with increasing weighted cumulative exposure. A similar deficit in all-cause (SMR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.96) and all-cancer (SMR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00) mortality was observed in those exposed to nonvolatile organochlorines. No excess risk was observed in cancers of a priori interest, although mortality from Hodgkin disease was elevated (SMR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.02-2.82) . In this study we found little evidence that exposure to organochlorines at the levels experienced in the pulp and paper industry is associated with an increased risk of cancer, apart from a weak but significant association between all-cancer mortality and weighted cumulative volatile organochlorine exposure.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".