Formaldehyde Exposure in U.S. Industries from OSHA Air Sampling Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
National occupational exposure databanks have been cited as sources of exposure data for exposure surveillance and exposure assessment for occupational epidemiology. Formaldehyde exposure data recorded in the U.S Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) between 1979 and 2001 were collected to elaborate a multi-industry retrospective picture of formaldehyde exposures and to identify exposure determinants. Due to the database design, only detected personal measurement results (n = 5228) were analyzed with linear mixed-effect models, which explained 29% of the total variance. Short-term measurement results were higher than time-weighted average (TWA) data and decreased 18% per year until 1987 (TWA data 5% per year) and 5% per year (TWA data 4% per year) after that. Exposure varied across industries with maximal estimated TWA geometric means (GM) for 2001 in the reconstituted wood products, structural wood members, and wood dimension and flooring industries (GM = 0.20 mg/m(3). Highest short-term GMs estimated for 2001 were in the funeral service and crematory and reconstituted wood products industries (GM = 0.35 mg/m(3). Exposure levels in IMIS were marginally higher during nonprogrammed inspections compared with programmed inspections. An increasing exterior temperature tended to cause a decrease in exposure levels for cold temperatures (-5% per 5 degrees C for T < 15 degrees C) but caused an increase in exposure levels for warm temperatures (+15% per 5 degrees C for T >15 degrees C). Concentrations measured during the same inspection were correlated and varied differently across industries and sample type (TWA, short term). Sensitivity analyses using TOBIT regression suggested that the average bias caused by excluding non-detects is approximately 30%, being potentially higher for short-term data if many non-detects were actually short-term measurements. Although limited by availability of relevant exposure determinants and potential selection biases in IMIS, these results provide useful insight on formaldehyde occupational exposure in the United States in the last two decades. The authors recommend that more information on exposure determinants be recorded in IMIS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".