Updated investigations of cancer excesses in individuals born or resident in the vicinity of Sellafield and Dounreay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Earlier studies have shown raised risks of leukaemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in children, teenagers and young adults resident either at birth or diagnosis in Seascale. Some increases in cancer risk in these age groups have also been noted among those living around Dounreay. We aimed to update previous analyses relating to areas close to these nuclear installations by considering data from an additional 16 years of follow-up. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses compared cancer incidence rates for 1963-2006 among those aged 0-24 years at diagnosis living in geographically specified areas around either Sellafield or Dounreay with general population rates. Cancer incidence for the period 1971-2006 among the cohort of Cumbrian births between 1950 and 2006 was compared to national incidence for 1971-2006 using person-years analysis. Cancer among those born in the postcode sector closest to Dounreay was compared with that among those born in the three adjoining postcode sectors. Analyses considered both cancer overall and ICD-O-3 defined diagnostic subgroups including leukaemia, central nervous system tumours and other malignancies. RESULTS: Apart from previously reported raised risks, no new significantly increased risks for cancer overall or any diagnostic subgroup were found among children or teenagers and young adults living around either nuclear installation. Individuals born close to the installations from 1950 to 2006 were not shown to be at any increased risk of cancer during the period 1971 to date. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of recent data suggests that children, teenagers and young adults currently living close to Sellafield and Dounreay are not at an increased risk of developing cancer. Equally, there is no evidence of any increased cancer risk later in life among those resident in these areas at birth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".