MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AGE DEPENDENCE OF NATURAL URANIUM AND THORIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN BONE

2007· article· en· W2057694389 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dominic Larivi re, Ana Paula Packer, Leonora Marro, Chunsheng Li, Jing Chen, R. J. Cornett

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Institute of Standards and Technology
KeywordsUraniumThoriumNatural uraniumRadiochemistryChemistryDeposition (geology)MineralogyGeologyMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The age dependence of the natural concentration of uranium and thorium in the skeleton was investigated using human vertebrae bone collected from two Canadian locations (Winnipeg, Manitoba, and Regina, Saskatchewan). The concentration of both radioelements in digested ashed bone samples was determined using sector-field inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. The geometric means for uranium level in bones showed a significant statistical difference between the two locations studied. Similarly for thorium, a statistical difference was observed, although this difference was considered marginal. The thorium concentration differed only marginally with respect to age group, indicating that its behavior in the body could be age-independent. Conversely, the uranium level in bones was found to change for the age groups tested, an indication of age-specific deposition. The age profile for uranium was comparable to the calcium turn-over rate, indicating that uranium deposition is probably, in part, dictated by this metabolic process, showing the role of present uptake into the uranium concentration in bones for populations exposed to significant uranium intake.

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)0.001
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PhysicsSame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207