MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202185418 · doi:10.5603/imh.2021.0038

Occupational noise exposure and health impacts among fish harvesters: a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3202185418 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Maritime Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusAnnoyanceHearing lossWeb of scienceNoise (video)MedicineSystematic reviewFish <Actinopterygii>Inclusion (mineral)Noise-induced hearing lossInclusion and exclusion criteriaOccupational safety and healthApplied psychologyNoise exposureAudiologyMEDLINEPsychologyEnvironmental healthComputer scienceMeta-analysisAlternative medicinePathologySocial psychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Occupational noise exposure has been identified as a significant risk factor for fish harvesters. Chronic noise exposure causes hearing and other health problems and undermines the quality of life and well-being. This review paper aims to highlight noise-related auditory and non-auditory health effects among fish harvesters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search approach was adopted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and by exploring grey literature. The literature search was conducted in 2020 (between October 15 and November 30). Relevant articles were explored by reviewing title, keywords, and abstract based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The full-text critical review of selected papers was made and finalized the most relevant studies. RESULTS: Initial 1,281 records were identified, exploring various databases and additional sources using relevant keywords. Duplicate articles were removed and retrieved 746 articles. After that, a screening of 746 research papers was done based on the selection criteria and finalised 28 articles for full-text review. Finally, articles were filtered based on the study's aim and extracted 17 papers for the final review. CONCLUSIONS: Noise-induced hearing loss was considered a significant health risk to fish harvesters across the studies, affecting physical and emotional well-being. The prevalence of hearing loss was observed from 6% to 80%. Other health problems, such as headache, dizziness, annoyance, stress, fatigue, elevated blood pressure, sleep disturbances, and impaired cognitive performance, were also reported. Further research is needed to validate the non-auditory health effects among fish harvesters.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.386 · 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