Development of a Job-Exposure Matrix for Assessment of Occupational Exposure to High-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (3 kHz–300 GHz)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to build a job-exposure matrix (JEM) using an international coding system and covering the non-thermal intermediate frequency (IF) (3-100 kHz, named IFELF), thermal IF (100 kHz-10 MHz, named IFRF), and radiofrequency (RF) (>10 MHz) bands. METHODS: Detailed occupational data were collected in a large population-based case-control study, INTEROCC, with occupations coded into the International Standard Classification of Occupations system 1988 (ISCO88). The subjects' occupational source-based ancillary information was combined with an existing source-exposure matrix and the reference levels of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) for occupational exposure to calculate estimates of level (L) of exposure to electric (E) and magnetic (H) fields by ISCO88 code and frequency band as ICNIRP ratios (IFELF) or squared ratios (IFRF and RF). Estimates of exposure probability (P) were obtained by dividing the number of exposed subjects by the total number of subjects available per job title. RESULTS: With 36 011 job histories collected, 468 ISCO88 (four-digit) codes were included in the JEM, of which 62.4% are exposed to RF, IFRF, and/or IFELF. As a reference, P values for RF E-fields ranged from 0.3 to 65.0% with a median of 5.1%. L values for RF E-fields (ICNIRP squared ratio) ranged from 6.94 × 10-11 to 33.97 with a median of 0.61. CONCLUSIONS: The methodology used allowed the development of a JEM for high-frequency electromagnetic fields containing exposure estimates for the largest number of occupations to date. Although the validity of this JEM is limited by the small number of available observations for some codes, this JEM may be useful for epidemiological studies and occupational health management programs assessing high-frequency electromagnetic field exposure in occupational settings.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".