Cadmium levels and sources of exposure among Canadian adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cadmium is a heavy metal found naturally in the environment that has been associated with negative health outcomes. The present study examines levels of blood cadmium (BCd), urinary cadmium (UCd), and the main sources of cadmium exposure among Canadians aged 20 to 79. DATA AND METHODS: The data are from cycles 1 (2007 to 2009) and 2 (2009 to 2011) of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS), including measures of BCd and UCd, markers of smoking status (self-reported and second-hand smoke exposure), and self-reported consumption of foods known to be high in cadmium. The relationship between sources of exposure and cadmium levels was examined descriptively. The magnitude of the contribution of different exposure sources was examined in regression models. RESULTS: Age and smoking status were the greatest contributors to BCd and UCd: older people and current smokers had the highest cadmium levels. Dietary exposure, while significant, was a modest contributor overall, but a more important source of cadmium among never-smokers. INTERPRETATION: Smoking was the greatest contributor to cadmium levels among Canadians aged 20 to 79. Dietary differences explained a small percentage of variation in cadmium 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".