Airway effects of traffic-related air pollution on outdoor workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Traffic-related air pollution has been well documented to be associated with increased risks of airway diseases in the general population. Particularly, susceptible subgroups have included children and endurance athletes exercising outdoors. Relatively little has been published on the risks for outdoor workers. The purpose of this review is to identify the relative airway risks of outdoor work in areas with increased vehicular air pollution. RECENT FINDINGS: We found a small body of recent literature published on this topic. Most of the relevant studies have focused on traffic police, petrol pump workers, and highway workers, especially in the urban areas of high traffic pollution. These studies suggest increases in respiratory symptoms and reduction in spirometric indices in nonsmoking workers in these occupations when compared with control individuals. Research is needed to investigate the relationship with duration of exposures in these workers, and to determine the duration and reversibility of effects in order to develop standards for safe working exposures. SUMMARY: A significant impact on airway function and respiratory symptoms has been reported from outdoor work with exposure to traffic pollution. Further research is needed to confirm these associations and to develop standards for safe outdoor work in urban settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".