MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186701884

Decreases in occupational exposure to ionizing radiation among Canadian dental workers.

2005· article· en· W2186701884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jan M. Zielinski, Michael J. Garner, Daniel Krewski, J. P. Ashmore, Pierre R. Band, Martha E. Fair, Huixa Jiang, E.G. Létourneau, R Semenciw, W. N. Sont

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIonizing radiationIncidence (geometry)CohortCancerPopulationStandardized mortality ratioCohort studyConfidence intervalMelanomaDemographyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineIrradiation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe doses of ionizing radiation and their possible associations with mortality rates and cancer incidence among Canadian dental workers. METHODS: The National Dose Registry (NDR) of Canada was used to assess occupational dose of ionizing radiation received by dental workers. The NDR cohort includes 42,175 people classified as dental workers. Subjects in the NDR were linked to both the Canadian Mortality Database and the Canadian Cancer Database to ascertain cause of death and cancer incidence, respectively. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 9,051 male and 33,124 female dental workers. A total of 656 incident cases of cancer and 558 deaths were observed. The standardized mortality ratio associated with all-cause mortality was 0.53 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.57). The incidence of cancer among dental workers was lower than that for the Canadian population for all cancers except melanoma of the skin (for melanoma, the standardized incidence ratio was 1.46 [90% CI 1.14-1.85]). Occupational doses of ionizing radiation among dentists and dental workers have decreased markedly since the 1950s. CONCLUSIONS: Dental workers receive very low doses of ionizing radiation, and these doses do not appear to be associated with any increase in cancer incidence; the increased incidence of melanoma is more likely related to other risk factors such as exposure to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207