MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2174991015

Rapid Decline in FEV1 in Grain Handlers

2015· article· en· W2174991015 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald A. Enarson, Sverre Vedal, Moira Chan‐Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Review of Respiratory Disease · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHay feverBronchitisAsthmaMedicineOdds ratioCohortDemographyOddsCohort studyRespiratory systemChronic bronchitisEnvironmental healthLogistic regressionInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have prospectively studied the respiratory health of a cohort of grain elevator workers in the Canadian west coast terminal elevators, beginning in 1975 and following them for 6 yr. We have used a “nested” case-control model to identify determinants of the worst trend in FEV1 over this period. The 10% of participants in this category had a mean decline of greater than 100 ml/yr. They were significantly more likely to have had a decline in FEV1 over a work week and to have nonspecific bronchial hyperreactivity. There was a significant relationship between the odds ratio of being a case and the mean level of dust exposure associated with the job and location at the work site; cases were associated with mean total dust levels greater than 5 mg/m3. We found no relationship between the odds ratio of being a case and a number of host factors, such as immediate skin reactivity to common allergens, history of asthma, bronchitis, or hay fever, or presence of respiratory symptoms. We conclude that exposure to gr...

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)0.000
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Review of Respiratory DiseaseSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207