Factors influencing duration of exposure with symptoms and costs of occupational asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most important factor for the prognosis of occupational asthma is the length of exposure with symptoms prior to removal from exposure. We wanted to identify factors, including socioeconomic status, that can influence the delay in submitting a claim to a medicolegal agency after the onset of asthmatic symptoms, and to confirm that this delay is associated with worse respiratory prognosis and higher direct costs. This is a cross-sectional study of subjects who claimed compensation for occupational asthma at the Workers' Compensation Board of Quebec, Canada. Data were collected at re-evaluation ∼2.5 yrs after diagnosis. Information on the number of years with symptoms and removal from exposure was obtained from the medicolegal file. 60 subjects were included in the study. Being older, having a revenue of >30,000 Canadian dollars and having occupational asthma due to high molecular weight agents were all positively associated with the number of years of exposure with symptoms before removal from exposure. Subjects with persistent airway hyperresponsiveness at follow-up had a higher number of years with symptoms. Experiencing symptoms in the workplace for <1 yr generated lower direct costs. These findings might help in surveillance programmes that could be preferentially targeted for these subgroups of workers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".