An Official American Thoracic Society Proceedings: Work-related Asthma and Airway Diseases. Presentations and Discussion from the Fourth Jack Pepys Workshop on Asthma in the Workplace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Work-related asthma is a common occupational lung disease. The scope of the Fourth Jack Pepys Workshop that was held in May 2010 went beyond asthma to include discussion of other occupational airway diseases, in particular occupationally related chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchiolitis. Aspects explored included public health considerations, environmental aspects, outcome after diagnosis, prevention and surveillance, and other work-related obstructive airway diseases. Consistent methods are needed to accurately estimate the comparative burden of occupation-related airway diseases among different countries. Challenges to accomplishing this include variability in health care delivery, compensation systems, cultural contexts, and social structures. These factors can affect disease estimates, while heterogeneity in occupations and workplace exposures can affect the underlying true prevalence of morbidity. Consideration of the working environment included discussion of practical methods of limiting exposure to respiratory sensitizers, methods to predict new sensitizers before introduction into workplaces, the role of legislated exposure limits, and models to estimate relative validity of various ameliorative measures when complete avoidance of the sensitizer is not feasible. Other strategies discussed included medical surveillance measures and education, especially for young individuals with asthma and new workers about to enter the workforce. Medical outcomes after development of sensitizer-induced occupational asthma are best following earlier diagnosis and removal from further exposure, but a subset may be able to continue working safely provided that exposure is reduced under close follow-up monitoring. It was recognized that occupationally related COPD is common but underappreciated, deserving further study and prevention efforts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".