MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274151532 · doi:10.1177/1559325815614302

Chromosome Damage Caused by Accidental Chronic Whole-Body Gamma Radiation Exposure in Thailand

2015· article· en· W2274151532 on OpenAlexafffund
Brant A. Ulsh, J.-A. Dolling, Josée N. Lavoie, R. E. J. Mitchel, Douglas R. Boreham

Bibliographic record

VenueDose-Response · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)McMaster University
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada LimitedMcMaster University
KeywordsChromosomal translocationChromosome aberrationMedicinePeripheral bloodAccidentalFluorescence in situ hybridizationChromosomePhysiologyInternal medicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In February 2000, a radiation incident involving a medical (60)Co source occurred in a metal scrapyard in Thailand. Several individuals were suspected to have received chronic or fractionated exposures ranging from a few mGy to a several Gy. Using fluorescence in situ hybridization to paint chromosomes, we determined the frequencies of chromosome aberrations in peripheral blood lymphocytes of 13 people who entered the scrapyard, 3 people who involved in recovering the source, and 9 nearby residents. Aberration frequencies greater than controls were observed in 13 of the donors at 3 months postexposure. The predominant form of aberration observed was simple, complete, symmetrical translocations. An approximate 50% decrease in these aberrations and in total color junctions was observed in 7 donors resampled at 16 months postexposure. Although high, acute exposures are known to have detrimental effects, the biological consequences of chronic, low dose-rate radiation exposures are unclear. Thirteen of the donors had elevated aberration frequencies, and 6 also had symptoms of acute radiation syndrome. If there are any long-term health consequences of this incident, it will most likely occur among this group of individuals. The consequences for the remaining donors, who presumably received lower total doses delivered at lower dose rates, are less clear.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDose-ResponseSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207