MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142504648 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq436

Estimation of uranium GI absorption fractions for children and adults

2010· article· en· W2142504648 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Chen, Dominic Larivière, Rachel Timmins, Kyle Verdecchia

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUraniumIngestionRadiochemistryDepleted uraniumEnriched uraniumInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryUranium oxideIsotopes of uraniumAbsorption (acoustics)Environmental chemistryChemistryEnvironmental scienceAnimal scienceMass spectrometryMaterials scienceChromatographyMetallurgyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uranium is ubiquitously found in drinking water and food. The gastrointestinal tract absorption fraction (f(1)) is an important parameter in risk assessment of uranium burdens from ingestion. Although absorption of uranium from ingestion has been studied extensively in the past, human data concerning children and adults are still limited. In a previous study based on measurements of uranium concentration in 73 bone-ash samples collected by Health Canada, the absorption fractions for uranium ingestion were determined to be 0.093 ± 0.113 for infants, and 0.050 ± 0.032 for young children ranging from 1 to 7 y of age. To extend the study, a total of 69 bone-ash samples were selected for children and adults ranging from 7 to 25 y of age and residing in the same Canadian community that is known to have an elevated level of uranium in its drinking water supply. For each bone-ash sample, the total uranium concentration was measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. To solve uranium transfer in the biokinetic model for uranium given in International Commission of Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 69 with estimated daily uranium intake, the program WinSAAM v3.0.1 was used. The absorption fractions were determined to be 0.030 ± 0.022 for children (7-18 y) and 0.021 ± 0.015 for adults (18-25 y). For anyone more than 18 y of age, the estimated f(1) value for uranium agree well with the ICRP recommended value of 0.02.

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)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207