MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012916339 · doi:10.1080/19338244.2010.511309

Estimating Occupational Beryllium Exposure from Compliance Monitoring Data

2011· article· en· W2012916339 on OpenAlexaff
Michele P Hamm, Igor Burstyn

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Environmental & Occupational Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBerylliumJob-exposure matrixOccupational exposureOccupational safety and healthExposure assessmentOccupational exposure limitEnvironmental healthOccupational medicinePersonal protective equipmentStatisticsOccupational hygieneEnvironmental scienceMedicineMathematicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occupational exposure to beryllium is widespread and is a health risk. The objectives of this study were to develop plausible models to estimate occupational airborne beryllium exposure. Compliance monitoring data were obtained from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for 12,148 personal measurements of beryllium exposure from 1979 to 2005. Industry codes were maintained as reported or collapsed based on the number of measurements per cell of a job-exposure matrix (JEM). Probability of exposure was predicted based on year, industry, job, and sampling duration. In these models, probability of exposure decreased over time, was highest in full-shift personal samples, and varied with industry and job. The probability of exposure was calculated using 6 JEMs, each providing similar rankings of the likelihood of non-negligible exposure to beryllium. These statistical models, with expert appraisal, are suitable for the assessment of the probability of elevated occupational exposure to beryllium.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Environmental & Occupational HealthSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207