MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517697972 · doi:10.1136/oemed-2016-103951.374

P050 Proportion of lung cancer attributable to workplace environmental tobacco smoke in canada

2016· article· en· W2517697972 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chaojie Song, Joanne Kim, Cheryl Peters, Chris McLeod, Victoria H Arrandale, Hugh Davies, France Labrèche, Jérôme Lavoué, Paul A. Demers

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité de MontréalWorld Wildlife Fund CanadaInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travailOccupational Cancer Research CentreCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerTobacco smokeEnvironmental healthMedicineSmokeOccupational exposureTobacco useOncologyGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Workplace environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) was historically a prevalent lung carcinogen in Canada, and remains a hazard in certain occupations. This study estimates the attributable fraction (AF) of lung cancers due to workplace ETS, and is part of a larger effort to estimate the current burden of occupational cancers in Canada. Methods The AF calculation requires estimates of the proportion of workers ever exposed (PrE) during the risk exposure period (REP, 1961 – 2000) and the relative risk (RR). To estimate the PrE, the proportion of never-smokers who were exposed to workplace ETS was calculated from Canadian data sources, then combined with historical Canadian employment statistics, labour force data and survival probabilities. Exposure duration was estimated using data from a national case-control study, and used to assign RRs based upon a dose-response relationship reported in the literature. We accounted for never-smoking lung cancer cases, using rates observed among never-smokers in a large US study (CPS-II). Results The proportion of never-smokers in men showed an increasing trend during the REP while in women the proportion decreased slightly. A drop in the proportion of workers exposed to workplace ETS was found in the 80’s and 90’s. Approximately 7.2 million workers were ever exposed to workplace ETS during the REP, of which half were female. Estimated AFs for ETS-related lung cancers were: 0.6% for males, and 0.5% for females, which equates to 74 lung cancer cases in men and 57 in women. This translates to AFs of 11.8% and 5.8% among never-smoking men and women, respectively. Conclusions Lung cancer attributable to workplace ETS was low in the Canadian population because a large proportion of lung cancer cases occurred among current or former smokers. When only considering the burden among never-smokers, we found a relatively large proportion of cases attributable to workplace ETS.

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)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207