MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of Occupational Cancer Risks in British Columbia: A Population-Based Case???Control Study of 769 Cases of Non-Hodgkin??s Lymphoma Analyzed by Histopathology Subtypes

2004· article· en· W2009579960 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Pierre R. Band, Nhu D. Le, Raymond Fang, Richard P. Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineHistopathologyEnvironmental healthOccupational exposureCancerPopulationLymphomaAlcohol consumptionEpidemiologyCase-control studyOccupational medicineIncidence (geometry)PathologyOncologyInternal medicineAlcoholBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have, as part of a program aimed at detecting occupational risk factors in British Columbia, collected lifetime occupational histories as well as information on lifetime cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption from 15,643 incident cancer cases, of whom 782 had a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Occupational risks for this cancer site are examined using a matched case-control study design, and the results are presented in this report for all cases and for histopathology subtypes. The results of our study indicate excess NHL risk, particularly for a number of occupations that involve exposures to electromagnetic fields, treated and fresh wood, metals, and solvents.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207