56 Incidence of mesotheliomas in Québec and Canada from 1984 through 2007: trends and estimate of future burden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives We compared the incidence rates of pleural (MPL) and peritoneal (MPR) mesotheliomas between Quebec and the rest of Canada to describe past and estimate future temporal trends of MPL in Quebec until the year 2032. Methods New cases occurring between 1984 and 2007 were counted in the Canadian Cancer Registry according to the international classification of diseases for Oncology, 3rd version (ICD-O-3). Equivalent ICD-O-1 coding was used to identify mesothelioma cases before 1992. Age-standardised rates were compared between sexes and regions. Poisson regressions were carried out to assess the effects of birth cohorts and to estimate future rates of MPL. Results The age-standardised incidence rates of MPL averaged 2.12 and 0.42 for 100000 person-years among Quebec men and women respectively. Age-adjusted rates of MPL were 1.45 (95% CI = 1.37–1.54) times higher in Quebec men and 2.00 (95% CI = 1.76–2.27) times in women than among Canadian men and women. The age-adjusted rate of MPR was 1.36 (95% CI = 1.09-1.68) times higher among Quebec residents than in the rest of Canada. A significant slowdown in the increase of MPL was observed after 1995. Younger cohorts experienced a lower incidence of MPL. The incidence of MPL should peak between 2008 and 2012 (at 2.79/100000 in Québec and 1.79/100000 in Canada). In Quebec, there would be an absolute excess of some 700 new male cases and 160 female cases over a 5-year period. Conclusions The observed higher and continuously increasing rates of MPL in Québec warrant a stricter surveillance of mesothelioma incidence and asbestos exposure to ensure that rates effectively drop down to background levels.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".