MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104867280 · doi:10.1667/rr3258

Analysis of the Mortality Experience amongst U.S. Nuclear Power Industry Workers after Chronic Low-Dose Exposure to Ionizing Radiation

2004· article· en· W2104867280 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Geoffrey R. Howe, Lydia B. Zablotska, J.J. Fix, John Egel, J. Buchanan

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsMedicineIonizing radiationConfidence intervalCohortRelative riskPopulationCohort studyDosimetryNuclear medicineDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthIrradiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workers employed in 15 utilities that generate nuclear power in the United States have been followed for up to 18 years between 1979 and 1997. Their cumulative dose from whole body ionizing radiation has been determined from the dose records maintained by the facilities themselves and the REIRS and REMS systems maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy, respectively. Mortality in the cohort from a number of causes has been analyzed with respect to individual radiation doses. The cohort displays a very substantial healthy worker effect, i.e. considerably lower cancer and noncancer mortality than the general population. Based on 26 and 368 deaths, respectively, positive though statistically nonsignificant associations were seen for mortality from leukemia (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia) and all solid cancers combined, with excess relative risks per sievert of 5.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) -2.56, 30.4] and 0.506 (95% CI -2.01, 4.64), respectively. These estimates are very similar to those from the atomic bomb survivors study, though the wide confidence intervals are also consistent with lower or higher risk estimates. A strong positive and statistically significant association between radiation dose and deaths from arteriosclerotic heart disease including coronary heart disease was also observed in the cohort, with an ERR of 8.78 (95% CI 2.10, 20.0). While associations with heart disease have been reported in some other occupational studies, the magnitude of the present association is not consistent with them and therefore needs cautious interpretation and merits further attention. At present, the relatively small number of deaths and the young age of the cohort (mean age at end of follow-up is 45 years) limit the power of the study, but further follow-up and the inclusion of the present data in an ongoing IARC combined analysis of nuclear workers from 15 countries will have greater power for testing the main hypotheses of interest.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations159
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation ResearchSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207