The INTEROCC case-control study: risk of meningioma and occupational exposure to selected combustion products, dusts and other chemical agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about occupational risk factors for meningioma. OBJECTIVES: To study whether risk of meningioma is associated with several occupational exposures, including selected combustion products, dusts and other chemical agents. METHODS: The INTEROCC study was an international case-control study of brain cancer conducted in seven countries. Data collection by interview included lifetime occupational histories. A job exposure matrix was used to derive estimates of exposure for the 12 agents. ORs for ever versus never exposed and for exposure-response using duration of exposure and cumulative exposure were derived using conditional logistic regression stratified by sex, age group, country/region, adjusted for education. RESULTS: These analyses included 1906 cases and 5565 controls. For 11 of the 12 agents, no excess risk was found for ever exposed. For ever exposure to oil mists, an elevated OR of 1.57 (95% CI 1.10 to 2.22, 51 exposed cases) was found. Statistically significant exposure-response relationships were observed with cumulative exposure (p=0.01) and duration of exposure (p=0.04). Among women, there were also significant trends for cumulative and duration of exposure to asbestos and excesses in the highest exposure categories for formaldehyde. CONCLUSIONS: Most agents examined did not provoke excess risks of meningioma. The main finding from this study is that it is the first study to identify a statistical association between exposure to oil mists and meningioma. This may be a chance finding or could be due to confounding with iron exposure and further research is required to understand whether the relationship is causal.
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".