MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037665129 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2014.887205

Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica at Alberta Work Sites

2014· article· en· W2037665129 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diane Radnoff, Maria S. Todor, Jeremy Beach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicosisDemolitionOccupational exposure limitOccupational exposureOccupational hygieneEnvironmental scienceSilica fumeToxicologyEnvironmental healthCementMaterials scienceMetallurgyOccupational safety and healthEngineeringMedicineComposite materialCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although crystalline silica has been recognized as a health hazard for many years, it is still encountered in many work environments. Numerous studies have revealed an association between exposure to respirable crystalline silica and the development of silicosis and other lung diseases including lung cancer. Alberta Jobs, Skills, Training and Labour conducted a project to evaluate exposure to crystalline silica at a total of 40 work sites across 13 industries. Total airborne respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica concentrations were quite variable, but there was a potential to exceed the Alberta Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) of 0.025 mg/m(3) for respirable crystalline silica at many of the work sites evaluated. The industries with the highest potentials for overexposure occurred in sand and mineral processing (GM 0.090 mg/m(3)), followed by new commercial building construction (GM 0.055 mg/m(3)), aggregate mining and crushing (GM 0.048 mg/m(3)), abrasive blasting (GM 0.027 mg/m(3)), and demolition (GM 0.027 mg/m(3)). For worker occupations, geometric mean exposure ranged from 0.105 mg/m(3) (brick layer/mason/concrete cutting) to 0.008 mg/m(3) (dispatcher/shipping, administration). Potential for GM exposure exceeding the OEL was identified in a number of occupations where it was not expected, such as electricians, carpenters and painters. These exposures were generally related to the specific task the worker was doing, or arose from incidental exposure from other activities at the work site. The results indicate that where there is a potential for activities producing airborne respirable crystalline silica, it is critical that the employer include all worker occupations at the work site in their hazard assessment. There appears to be a relationship between airborne total respirable dust concentration and total respirable dust concentrations, but further study is require to fully characterize this relationship. If this relationship holds true, it may provide a useful hazard assessment tool for employers by which the potential for exposure to airborne respirable silica at the work site can be more easily estimated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations38
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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