MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091502845 · doi:10.1080/15459620903389558

Anthrax Letters: Personal Exposure, Building Contamination, and Effectiveness of Immediate Mitigation Measures

2009· article· en· W2091502845 on OpenAlexaff
Bill Kournikakis, Jim Ho, Scott Duncan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolContaminationEnvironmental scienceSprayerAerosolizationBacillus anthracisIndoor bioaerosolContamination controlDeskToxicologyEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementMeteorologyEnvironmental chemistryEngineeringChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report is the first detailed and quantitative study of potential mitigation procedures intended to deal with anthrax letters using a simulated anthrax letter release within an actual office building. Spore aerosols were created by opening letters containing 0.1 g of dry powdered Bacillus atrophaeus spores. Culturable aerosol samples were collected using slit-to-agar and filter-based samplers. Five test scenarios were designed to determine whether simple mitigation procedures or activities carried out by the person who opened the letter made a significant difference to aerosol concentrations in comparison to a control scenario where no activity took place. Surface contamination of the letter opener was measured at 10 body points for Scenarios 1 to 4. A sixth scenario, based on published Centers for Disease Control and Prevention anthrax letter response guidelines, used letters containing 1 g of spores. Results demonstrated that the spore aerosol spread throughout the building in less than 4.5 min. Potential mitigation techniques such as closing the office door or shutting off the ventilation system were not effective. Activities carried out by the letter opener including moving, walking to another location, and spraying water onto the contaminated desk with a hand sprayer all resulted in significantly higher aerosol concentrations in comparison to control. The potential total inhalational hazard for the letter opener during the five test scenarios ranged from 4.1 x 10(5) to 1.6 x 10(6) colony forming units (CFU) compared to 3.9 x 10(5) CFU for the control. Surface contamination of the letter opener (Scenarios 1 to 4) was highest on the right hip (4.8 x 10(4) to 1.0 x 10(5) CFU/cm(- 2)) and lowest on the right or left side of the head (2.2 x 10(2) to 3.7 x 10(3) CFU/cm(-2)). The statistically based methodology used in this study provided the means to objectively assess anthrax letter protocols to determine their effectiveness under realistic conditions. Potential mitigation procedures tested in this study did not reduce aerosol hazard or surface contamination.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicBacillus and Francisella bacterial researchFrench-language works237,207