Risk of Lung Cancer Mortality in Nuclear Workers from Internal Exposure to Alpha Particle-emitting Radionuclides
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carcinogenic risks of internal exposures to alpha-emitters (except radon) are poorly understood. Since exposure to alpha particles-particularly through inhalation-occurs in a range of settings, understanding consequent risks is a public health priority. We aimed to quantify dose-response relationships between lung dose from alpha-emitters and lung cancer in nuclear workers. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study, nested within Belgian, French, and UK cohorts of uranium and plutonium workers. Cases were workers who died from lung cancer; one to three controls were matched to each. Lung doses from alpha-emitters were assessed using bioassay data. We estimated excess odds ratio (OR) of lung cancer per gray (Gy) of lung dose. RESULTS: The study comprised 553 cases and 1,333 controls. Median positive total alpha lung dose was 2.42 mGy (mean: 8.13 mGy; maximum: 316 mGy); for plutonium the median was 1.27 mGy and for uranium 2.17 mGy. Excess OR/Gy (90% confidence interval)-adjusted for external radiation, socioeconomic status, and smoking-was 11 (2.6, 24) for total alpha dose, 50 (17, 106) for plutonium, and 5.3 (-1.9, 18) for uranium. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence for associations between low doses from alpha-emitters and lung cancer risk. The excess OR/Gy was greater for plutonium than uranium, though confidence intervals overlap. Risk estimates were similar to those estimated previously in plutonium workers, and in uranium miners exposed to radon and its progeny. Expressed as risk/equivalent dose in sieverts (Sv), our estimates are somewhat larger than but consistent with those for atomic bomb survivors.See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B232.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it