MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095154796 · doi:10.1097/jom.0b013e3182122376

Reduction in Diisocyanate and Non-Diisocyanate Sensitizer-Induced Occupational Asthma in Ontario

2011· article· en· W2095154796 on OpenAlexaffabout
Larisa Buyantseva, Gary M. Liss, Marcos Ribeiro, Michael Manno, Carol E. Luce, Susan M. Tarlo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational asthmaAsthmaToluene diisocyanateOccupational exposureReduction (mathematics)MedicineEnvironmental healthPolyurethaneChemistryImmunologyOrganic chemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate relative frequency and features of diisocyanate (ISO) and non-diisocyanate (N-ISO) allowed occupational asthma (OA) claims in Ontario, Canada, during a 5-year period (1998 to 2002). METHODS: Records were abstracted from the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board using methodology similar to our previous investigation that had identified 30 ISO and 30 N-ISO claims/yr during 1980 to 1993. RESULTS: There were 99 OA claims: 37 ISO (7.4 claims/yr) and 62 N-ISO (12.4 claims/yr). The ISO group had more males (86% vs 69%, p = 0.01), but there were no other significant differences. The commonest professions were spray painters (41%) and production workers (38%) in the ISO group and production workers (49%) and health care workers (8%) in the N-ISO group. CONCLUSIONS: ISO and N-ISO claims declined from the previous period, especially for ISO, perhaps because of effective surveillance programs.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207