MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071643856 · doi:10.1097/jom.0b013e3181884be0

Effects of Grain Dust on Lungs Prior to and Following Dust Remediation

2008· article· en· W2071643856 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Punam Pahwa, James A. Dosman, Helen H. McDuffie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsCanadian Rural Health Research SocietySaskatchewan Health Authority
FundersIndustry Canada
KeywordsVital capacityLung functionMedicineEnvironmental sciencePulmonary function testingGrain sizeEnvironmental healthAnimal scienceLungMetallurgyMaterials scienceInternal medicineDiffusing capacity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine longitudinal estimates of pulmonary function decline in Canadian grain elevator workers before and after dust control by analyzing data collected from five regions of Canada over 15 years. METHODS: Declines in forced expired volume in one second and forced vital capacity before and after dust control were estimated by using a generalized estimating equations approach. RESULTS: For grain workers who were in the grain industry for 20 or more years both before and after dust control: the mean annual loss of forced expired volume in one second was greatest among current smoking grain workers followed by ex-smokers and nonsmokers, respectively. Similar results were obtained for forced vital capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Grain dust control was effective in reducing decline in the lung function measurements among grain workers in all smoking and exposure categories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207