MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967289925 · doi:10.1136/oem-2019-epi.27

O1D.5 Non-detects in OSHA’s IMIS databank: are they short-term or shift-long samples?

2019· article· en· W2967289925 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Sarazin, George Luta, Igor Burstyn, Laurel Kincl, Jérôme Lavoué

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational and Environmental Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeSampling (signal processing)StatisticsTerm (time)Environmental scienceMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives The Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) is the largest multi-industry source of exposure measurements available in North America. However, the lack of information on the censoring value (that depends on duration of sampling) of non-detected (ND) measurements considerably limits the usefulness of this databank. Released in 2010, the Chemical Exposure Health Database (CEHD) contains analytical results and measurement details, including duration of sampling for some of the records in IMIS. We assessed which ND results stored in IMIS are short-term (ST), and which are shift-long (LT) samples, based on information available in CEHD. Methods We analyzed exposure measurements for 54 agents from 1984–2009 (n=238,826). First, we calculated kappa coefficients (&_x0138;) for each agent to investigate the agreement between the exposure type of IMIS detected records (already indicated as ST or LT, i.e. selected by OSHA officers) and the exposure type suggested by sampling duration found in CEHD. If &_x0138; exceeded 0.3 for an agent, we employed classification and regression trees (CART) models to predict whether the ND results from IMIS should be classified as ST or LT samples. CART was developed using CEHD and applied to IMIS, relying on predictors common to both databanks: industry, reason for inspection, scope of inspection, region, union status, and year of sampling. Results The median proportion of ND results per agent was 37% (interquartile range (IQR)=22%–62%). The median &_x0138; was 0.45 (IQR=0.37–0.64) and 0.03 (IQR=0.01–0.16) for solvents/gases and metals/isocyanates, respectively. Solvents (n=22) and gases (n=7) were selected for CART modeling. Industry was the most important predictor variable in classifying ND results into either ST or LT. Conclusions This novel approach can be used to assign a censoring value to ND results, thus allowing more accurate inference about distribution of exposure levels in IMIS.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207