Occupation and Lymphoid Malignancies: Results From a French Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Investigating relationships between potential occupational risk factors and lymphoid malignancy (LM). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter hospital-based case-control study in France between 2000 and 2004, including 824 incident cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), multiple myeloma, and "lymphoproliferative syndrome" and 752 frequency-matched controls. Data were collected through face-to-face standardized and detailed interviews. RESULTS: Farming was significantly associated with NHL (odds ratio [OR] = 1.4 [1.0 to 2.0]) and, although not significantly, with lymphoproliferative syndrome and multiple myeloma. ORs were higher for longest durations of exposure. Self-declared exposure to pesticides was significantly associated with NHL (OR = 1.8 [1.2 to 2.7]) and HL (OR = 2.2 [1.0 to 4.7]). Neither solvent-related jobs nor self-reported exposure to solvents were related to LM. Systematic screening based on job titles did not evidence any other association. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the hypothesis that farming plays a role in most types of LM.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".