MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212003117 · doi:10.1186/s12890-021-01721-1

Early signs of pneumoconiosis in a dental technician in Italy: a case report

2021· article· en· W3212003117 on OpenAlexaff
Mara Maria Tiraboschi, Emma Sala, Matteo Ferroni, Andrea Tironi, Andrea Borghesi, Maria Enrica Gilberti, Paolo Ceruti, Emanuele Sansone, Giuseppe De Palma

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pulmonary Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPneumoconiosisMedicineDental technicianBronchoalveolar lavageTechnicianUrinalysisHard metalDentistryInhalationPathologyDermatologyLungInternal medicineUrinary systemMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dental technicians are at high risk of pneumoconiosis, usually driven by inhalation of mixed dusts, including metals. An etiological diagnosis is not easy to be performed, particularly in advanced stages. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe the case of an early pneumoconiosis occurring in a 47-year-old dental technician who developed respiratory symptoms shortly after beginning work. She described the work environment as dusty and lacking relevant primary prevention tools. A chest CT showed multiple peripheral pseudonodular lesions in both lower lobes; bronchoalveolar lavage and bronchial aspirate evidenced numerous macrophages with reflective metal bodies included into the cytoplasm, that at scanning electron microscopy coupled to Energy Dispersive X-Ray Analysis resulted Zirconium and Aluminum, whereas Tungsten (W) was localized outside cells. End of shift urinary concentrations of W were substantially raised as compared to pre-shift (1.1 vs. 0.2 µg/L). CONCLUSIONS: We concluded for diagnosis of early work-related pneumoconiosis due to abnormal occupational exposure to metals. The case demonstrates the need also for dental professionals to comply with industrial hygiene standards and to be monitored by occupational health physicians.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pulmonary MedicineSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207