MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178650853 · doi:10.3390/ijms22147504

Biomarkers of Genotoxicity in Medical Workers Exposed to Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

2021· review· en· W3178650853 on OpenAlexaff
Clémence Baudin, Marie Odile Bernier, Dmitry Klokov, Maria Grazia Andreassi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotoxicityIonizing radiationMeta-analysisMedicineToxicologyEnvironmental healthPharmacologyBiologyToxicityInternal medicineIrradiationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical staff represent the largest group of workers occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation (IR). Chronic exposure to low-dose IR may result in DNA damage and genotoxicity associated with increased risk of cancer. This review aims to identify the genotoxicity biomarkers that are the most elevated in IR-exposed vs. unexposed health workers. A systematic review of the literature was performed to retrieve relevant studies with various biomarkers of genotoxicity. Subsequent meta-analyses produced a pooled effect size for several endpoints. The search procedure yielded 65 studies. Chromosome aberrations (CA) and micronuclei (MN) frequencies were significantly different between IR-exposed and unexposed workers (θpooled = 3.19, 95% CI 1.46–4.93; and θpooled = 1.41, 95% CI 0.97–1.86, for total aberrant cells and MN frequencies, respectively), which was not the case for ring chromosomes and nucleoplasmic bridges. Although less frequently used, stable translocations, sister chromatid exchanges (SCE) and comet assay endpoints were also statistically different between IR-exposed and unexposed workers. This review confirms the relevance of CA and MN as genotoxicity biomarkers that are consistently elevated in IR-exposed vs. unexposed workers. Other endpoints are strong candidates but require further studies to validate their usefulness. The integration of the identified biomarkers in future prospective epidemiological studies is encouraged.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.017
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207