Longitudinal and Cross-sectional Analyses of Lung Function in Toluene Diisocyanate Production Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate lung function among toluene diisocyanate (TDI) production workers. METHODS: One hundred ninety-seven U.S workers performed spirometry from 2006 through 2012. Results were compared within the study cohort and with U.S. population measures. A mixed-effects model assessed factors affecting repeated forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measurements. RESULTS: The cohort's mean FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC) percent reference values, although greater than 90%, were significantly lower and the prevalence of abnormal spirometry (predominantly restrictive pattern) was significantly higher than in the U.S. POPULATION: Differences in lung function among workers with higher cumulative TDI exposure were in the direction of an exposure effect, but not significant. CONCLUSION: We found little evidence of an adverse effect of TDI exposure on longitudinal spirometry in these workers. The association between TDI exposure and the increasing prevalence of a restrictive pattern needs further exploration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".