Occupational Exposure to Silica in Construction Workers: A Literature-Based Exposure Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We created an exposure database of respirable crystalline silica levels in the construction industry from the literature. We extracted silica and dust exposure levels in publications reporting silica exposure levels or quantitative evaluations of control effectiveness published in or after 1990. The database contains 6118 records (2858 of respirable crystalline silica) extracted from 115 sources, summarizing 11,845 measurements. Four hundred and eighty-eight records represent summarized exposure levels instead of individual values. For these records, the reported summary parameters were standardized into a geometric mean and a geometric standard deviation. Each record is associated with 80 characteristics, including information on trade, task, materials, tools, sampling strategy, analytical methods, and control measures. Although the database was constructed in French, 38 essential variables were standardized and translated into English. The data span the period 1974-2009, with 92% of the records corresponding to personal measurements. Thirteen standardized trades and 25 different standardized tasks are associated with at least five individual silica measurements. Trade-specific respirable crystalline silica geometric means vary from 0.01 (plumber) to 0.30 mg/m³ (tunnel construction skilled labor), while tasks vary from 0.01 (six categories, including sanding and electrical maintenance) to 1.59 mg/m³ (abrasive blasting). Despite limitations associated with the use of literature data, this database can be analyzed using meta-analytical and multivariate techniques and currently represents the most important source of exposure information about silica exposure in the construction industry. It is available on request to the research community.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.041 | 0.043 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".