MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2156972348

Estimated quantity of mercury in amalgam waste water residue released by dentists into the sewerage system in Ontario, Canada.

2004· article· en· W2156972348 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Albert O. Adegbembo, Philip Watson

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Amalgam (chemistry)DentistrySewerageMedicineWaste managementEnvironmental scienceChemistryEnvironmental engineeringEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To estimate the quantity of dental amalgam that Ontario dentists release into waste water. METHODS: Information from a self-administered postal survey of Ontario dentists was combined with the results of other experiments on the weight of amalgam restorations and the quantity of amalgam waste that bypasses solids separators in dental offices. Algorithms were developed to compute the quantity of amalgam waste leaving dental offices when dentists used or did not use ISO 11143 amalgam particle separators. RESULTS: A total of 878 (44.0%) of 1,994 sampled dentists responded to the survey. It was estimated that Ontario dentists removed 1,880.32 kg of amalgam (940.16 kg of mercury) during 2002, of which 1,128.19 kg of amalgam (564.10 kg of mercury) would have been released into waste water in Ontario if no dentists had been using a separator. Approximately 22% of the dentists reported using amalgam particle separators. On the basis of current use of amalgam separators, it was estimated that 861.78 kg of amalgam (430.89 kg of mercury or 170.72 mg per dentist daily) was released in 2002. The use of amalgam separators by all dentists could reduce the quantity of amalgam (and mercury) entering waste water to an estimated 12.41 kg (6.21 kg of mercury, or 2.46 mg per dentist per day). CONCLUSION: Amalgam particles separators can dramatically reduce amalgam and mercury loading in waste water released from dental offices.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→