Alternative magnetic field exposure metrics: Relationship to TWA, appliance use, and demographic characteristics of children in a leukemia survival study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing Childhood Leukemia Survival Study is examining the possible association between magnetic field exposure and survival of children with newly diagnosed acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL). We report the results of the first year 24 h personal magnetic field monitoring for 356 US and Canadian children by time weighted average TWA and alternative exposure metrics. The mean TWA of 0.12 microT was similar to earlier personal exposure studies involving children. A high correlation was found between 24 h TWA and alternative metrics: 12 h day TWA, 12 night TWA, geometric mean, 95th percentile value, percentage time over 0.2 and 0.3 microT, and an estimate of field stability (Constant Field Metric). Two measures of field intermittency, rate of change metric (RCM) and standardized rate of change metric (RCMS), were not highly correlated with TWA. The strongest predictor of TWA was location of residence, with highest TWAs associated with urban areas. Residence in an apartment, lower paternal educational level, and residential mobility were also associated with higher TWAs. There were no significant differences in the appliance use patterns of children with higher TWA values. Children with the highest field intermittency (high RCM) were more likely to sit within 3 feet of a video game attached to the TV. Our results suggest that 24 h TWA is a representative metric for certain patterns of exposure, but is not highly correlated with two metrics that estimate field intermittency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".