MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051829145 · doi:10.1136/oem.2009.047720

An improved estimate of the quantitative relationship between polycyclic hydrocarbons and lung cancer

2009· letter· en· W2051829145 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dario Mirabelli

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational and Environmental Medicine · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerPyreneBenzo(a)pyreneCohortEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental healthJob-exposure matrixAluminium smeltingCohort studyDemographyToxicologyMedicineOccupational exposureEnvironmental chemistrySmeltingOncologyChemistryBiologyInternal medicineMetallurgyMaterials scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this issue of the journal, Armstrong and Gibbs ( see page 740 ) report the updated results from a mortality study of a large cohort of Quebec aluminium smelter workers.1 2 The focus of their analysis is the quantitative relationship between exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and mortality from lung cancer. Ten more years of follow-up were added along with new cohorts from additional smaller plants for comparison with previously published data3; the study is now the largest ever conducted in aluminium smelting, with 16 431 individuals followed since as far back as 1950 and 677 observed lung cancer deaths.4 More importantly, individual job histories and smoking habits have been recovered, and historical measurements of exposure to benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) and benzene-soluble matter (BSM) could be used to develop a job-exposure matrix (JEM). By applying the JEM, cumulative exposures to BaP and BSM were calculated at the individual level.5 Thus, both statistical power and high quality exposure data were obtained by Armstrong and Gibbs. A new estimate of the slope (and …

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)0.028
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207