Uncertainties associated with assessing Ontario uranium miners’ exposure to radon daughters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ontario uranium miners study is a large (n = 28 546) cohort with low levels of radon exposure relative to other uranium miner cohorts. Multiple methods were used over time to estimate annual occupational exposure to radon daughters including: mine-specific extrapolations by mining engineers, area sampling in limited areas of the mines combined with approximate working time and lastly, consistent exposure sampling in different locations of the mine combined with workers' time cards. Nonetheless, estimating exposures involves assumptions that lead to some uncertainty in occupational exposure characterisation arising from the assessment approach and variability within workplace, over time and by individual. An evaluation of the total uncertainty associated with radon daughter exposure estimation in Ontario miners over time has not been conducted. The objective of this study was to identify the contributing sources and assess the total uncertainty associated with estimating occupational radon daughter exposure among underground Ontario uranium miners over the course of uranium mining. The five sources of radon daughter exposure uncertainty evaluated were: natural variations in radon concentration, estimation of working time, precision of the radon measurement method, unintended errors during sampling, and record keeping and transcription of exposure data. These sources were examined separately for the period 1958 to 1967 and then 1968 onward due to changes in radon daughter concentration measurement practices between these periods. The magnitude of uncertainty associated with each of these sources over time were determined by reviewing historical literature on uranium mining in Ontario as well as through expert advice. Using the root sum square method, the total radon daughter exposure uncertainty was found to be 53 to 67% in the earlier period of uranium mining from 1958 to 1967. This decreased to 31 to 39% for the period 1968 to 1996 with natural variations of radon daughter concentrations in mines accounting for the largest percentage of uncertainty. This assessment provides an initial step in understanding the effect of exposure uncertainty on risk estimates. The impact of this uncertainty on the dose-response relationship between radon exposure and cancer risk will be assessed in future work.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 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".