Silica Exposure During Construction Activities: Statistical Modeling of Task-Based Measurements from the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many construction activities can put workers at risk of breathing silica containing dusts, and there is an important body of literature documenting exposure levels using a task-based strategy. In this study, statistical modeling was used to analyze a data set containing 1466 task-based, personal respirable crystalline silica (RCS) measurements gathered from 46 sources to estimate exposure levels during construction tasks and the effects of determinants of exposure. Monte-Carlo simulation was used to recreate individual exposures from summary parameters, and the statistical modeling involved multimodel inference with Tobit models containing combinations of the following exposure variables: sampling year, sampling duration, construction sector, project type, workspace, ventilation, and controls. Exposure levels by task were predicted based on the median reported duration by activity, the year 1998, absence of source control methods, and an equal distribution of the other determinants of exposure. The model containing all the variables explained 60% of the variability and was identified as the best approximating model. Of the 27 tasks contained in the data set, abrasive blasting, masonry chipping, scabbling concrete, tuck pointing, and tunnel boring had estimated geometric means above 0.1mg m(-3) based on the exposure scenario developed. Water-fed tools and local exhaust ventilation were associated with a reduction of 71 and 69% in exposure levels compared with no controls, respectively. The predictive model developed can be used to estimate RCS concentrations for many construction activities in a wide range of circumstances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".