MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035487694 · doi:10.1097/jom.0b013e31818345bb

Occupational Exposure to Asbestos and Man-Made Vitreous Fibers, and Risk of Lung Cancer: Evidence From Two Case-Control Studies in Montreal, Canada

2008· article· en· W2035487694 on OpenAlexaffabout
Javier Pintos, Marie‐Élise Parent, Marie‐Claude Rousseau, Bruce W. Case, Jack Siemiatycki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsArmand Frappier MuseumInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsbestosOdds ratioMedicineConfidence intervalCase-control studyPopulationLung cancerCohort studyRelative riskAttributable riskEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of occupational asbestos and man-made vitreous fibers (MMVF) on the risk of lung cancer in two population-based case-control studies entailing exposure at lower levels than in historic cohort studies. METHODOLOGY: Study I (1979 to 1986) comprised 857 cases and 1066 population and cancer controls. Study II (1996 to 2001) comprised 858 cases and 1295 population controls. A detailed job history was obtained to evaluate lifetime occupational exposure to 294 agents, including asbestos and MMVF. RESULTS: We found increased risks for substantial exposure to asbestos (odds ratio = 1.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.94 to 3.36). The corresponding odds ratio for substantial exposure to MMVF was 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 0.37 to 3.22). DISCUSSION: Low and moderate levels of exposure to asbestos, as encountered in this population, were associated with some excess risk of lung cancer. Results for MMVF were inconclusive.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207