MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616412457 · doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3346-x

Cancer risks in a population-based study of 70,570 agricultural workers: results from the Canadian census health and Environment cohort (CanCHEC)

2017· article· en· W2616412457 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Linda Kachuri, Marianne Harris, Jill MacLeod, Michael Tjepkema, Paul A. Peters, Paul A. Demers

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversityOccupational Cancer Research CentreCancer Care OntarioPublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineCohortHazard ratioPopulationCancer registryCancerDemographyCohort studyConfidence intervalEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Agricultural workers may be exposed to potential carcinogens including pesticides, sensitizing agents and solar radiation. Previous studies indicate increased risks of hematopoietic cancers and decreased risks at other sites, possibly due to differences in lifestyle or risk behaviours. We present findings from CanCHEC (Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort), the largest national population-based cohort of agricultural workers. METHODS: Statistics Canada created the cohort using deterministic and probabilistic linkage of the 1991 Canadian Long Form Census to National Cancer Registry records for 1992-2010. Self-reported occupations were coded using the Standard Occupational Classification (1991) system. Analyses were restricted to employed persons aged 25-74 years at baseline (N = 2,051,315), with follow-up until December 31, 2010. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were modeled using Cox proportional hazards for all workers in agricultural occupations (n = 70,570; 70.8% male), stratified by sex, and adjusted for age at cohort entry, province of residence, and highest level of education. RESULTS: A total of 9515 incident cancer cases (7295 in males) occurred in agricultural workers. Among men, increased risks were observed for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.00-1.21), prostate (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.06-1.16), melanoma (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.02-1.31), and lip cancer (HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.70-2.70). Decreased risks in males were observed for lung, larynx, and liver cancers. Among female agricultural workers there was an increased risk of pancreatic cancer (HR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.07-1.72). Increased risks of melanoma (HR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.17-2.73), leukemia (HR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.24-3.25) and multiple myeloma (HR = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.16-4.37) were observed in a subset of female crop farmers. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to pesticides may have contributed to increased risks of hematopoietic cancers, while increased risks of lip cancer and melanoma may be attributed to sun exposure. The array of decreased risks suggests reduced smoking and alcohol consumption in this occupational group compared to the general population.

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)0.001
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations104
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicPesticide Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207