Analysis of mortality in a pooled cohort of Canadian and German uranium processing workers with no mining experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Long-term health risks of occupational exposures to uranium processing were examined to better understand potential differences with uranium underground miners and nuclear reactor workers. METHODS: A cohort study of mortality of workers from Port Hope, Canada (1950-1999) and Wismut, Germany (1946-2008) employed in uranium milling, refining, and processing was conducted. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association between cumulative exposures to radon decay products (RDP) and gamma-rays and causes of death potentially related to uranium processing. RESULTS: The pooled cohort included 7431 workers (270,201 person-years of follow-up). Mean RDP exposures were lower than in miners while gamma-ray doses were higher than in reactor workers. Both exposures were highly correlated (weighted rho = 0.81). Radiation risks of lung cancer and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in males were increased but not statistically significant and compatible with risks estimated for miners and reactor workers, respectively. Higher RDP-associated CVD risks were observed for exposures 5-14 years prior to diagnosis compared to later exposures and among those employed <5 years. Radiation risks of solid cancers excluding lung cancer were increased, but not statistically significant, both for males and females, while all other causes of death were not associated with exposures. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest study of uranium processing workers to systematically examine radiation risks of multiple outcomes from RDP exposures and gamma-rays, estimated radiation risks were compatible with risks reported for uranium miners and nuclear reactor workers. Continued follow-up and pooling with other cohorts of uranium processing workers are necessary for future comparisons with other workers of the nuclear fuel cycle.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".