Measures of Cumulative Exposure from a Standardized Sun Exposure History Questionnaire: A Comparison with Histologic Assessment of Solar Skin Damage
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultraviolet radiation exposure is the dominant environmental determinant of all major forms of skin cancer; however, the nature of the association is incompletely understood. Existing instruments to capture sun exposure history tend to yield reproducible results, but the validity of these responses is unknown. To address this question, the authors examined the relation between responses to a standardized sun exposure instrument and histologic evidence of actinic damage in a population-based study of keratinocyte cancers from New Hampshire diagnosed from July 1, 1997, through March 31, 2000. A single study dermatopathologist histologically reviewed the adjacent skin of 925 skin cancer biopsies for the presence of solar keratoses and the extent of solar elastosis. The authors compared these measures with responses to a personal interview on history of sunburns, sunbathing, and time spent outdoors. Focusing on site-specific exposure, they found variables that estimated cumulative exposure related to histologic evidence of actinic damage. In contrast, measures of acute/intermittent exposure were generally unrelated to solar damage histologically. Findings suggest that cumulative, but not intermittent, measures of sun exposure derived from a personal interview appear to reflect a person's exposure history based on histologic evidence.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it