Risk of Selected Cancers due to Occupational Exposure to Chlorinated Solvents in a Case–Control Study in Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between exposure to chlorinated solvents and cancer. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of occupational exposures and cancer in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, including 3730 cancer cases and 533 population controls. Occupational exposures were derived using a combination of subject-reported job history and expert assessment. We examined the associations between two chemical families and six chlorinated solvents with 11 sites of cancer. RESULTS: The majority of the associations examined were null, although many were based on small numbers. We found two significantly elevated odds ratios (ORs), one between perchloroethylene and prostate cancer (OR = 4.3; 95% CI: 1.4 to 13) and another between trichloroethylene and melanoma (OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 1.0 to 9.9). CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence of associations between chlorinated solvents and cancer. Limited power precludes strong inferences about absence of risk. We raise hypotheses about two possible associations: perchloroethylene with prostate cancer and trichloroethylene with melanoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".