1610b ‘workplace health without borders’ – building capacity in the reduction of exposure to respirable crystalline silica (rcs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction RCS exposure remains a major concern both in developed and developing countries. A recent assessment estimated that about 4 40 000 deaths from cancer attributable to RCS exposure will occur in Europe alone, from 2010 to 2069; the burden and loss of life in economically developing countries is anticipated to be even more bleak. Unless exposure to RCS is controlled, many hundreds of thousands of lives will be lost from silicosis, silico-tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer. One aim of the international non-profit organisation, Workplace Health Without Borders (WHWB, www.whwb.org), is to build expertise in preventing workplace disease and injury worldwide. There is a wealth of experience amongst the WHWB membership in assessing the health risk and controlling exposures to RCS. Information shared through WHWB can be leveraged in economically developing countries to expedite the reduction of the unacceptably high risk of lung disease by preventing exposures. Methods An overview of the global silica problem will be presented using the latest epidemiological literature as a reference; also a snapshot of learnings, good practices from WHWB presentations, training, and control initiatives such as those provided for agate workers in India. Learnings from research carried out in Queensland, Australia will be shared, to facilitate improvement in RCS exposure reduction, internationally. Results WHWB is considered as an ‘information hub’ and ‘conduit of good practices’. Through its membership, collaborations can be developed to expedite good practices, which in turn can be shared globally. Additionally, the WHWB initiatives in reducing exposures to RCS align well with the ongoing WHO efforts to document the number of silicosis cases, worldwide. Discussion WHWB is working collaboratively to focus its efforts while avoiding duplication, especially in underserved populations and for informal work groups and communities. Partners who work closely with WHWB on RCS education and exposure control include OHTA and the University of Toronto, amongst others.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.013 |
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".