Characterizing occupational radon exposure greater than 100 Bq/m3 in a highly exposed country
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Radon is an established lung carcinogen concentrating in indoor environments with importance for many workers worldwide. However, a systematic assessment of radon levels faced by all workers, not just those with direct uranium or radon exposure, has not previously been completed. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of workers exposed to radon, and the level of exposure (> 100–200 Bq/m 3 , 200–400 Bq/m 3 , 400–800 Bq/m 3 , and > 800 Bq/m 3 ) in a highly exposed country (Canada). Exposures among underground workers were assessed using the CAREX Canada approach. Radon concentrations in indoor workplaces, obtained from two Canadian surveys, were modelled using lognormal distributions. Distributions were then applied to the susceptible indoor worker population to yield the number of exposed workers, by occupation, industry, province, and sex. In total, an estimated 603,000 out of Canada’s 18,268,120 workers are exposed to radon in Canada. An estimated52% of exposed workers are women, even though they comprise only 48% of the labour force. The majority (68%) are exposed at a level of > 100–200 Bq/m 3 . Workers are primarily exposed in educational services, professional, scientific and technical services, and health care and social assistance, but workers in mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction have the largest number of exposed workers at high levels (> 800 Bq/m 3 ). Overall, a significant number of workers are exposed to radon, many of whom are not adequately protected by existing guidelines. Radon surveys across multiple industries and occupations are needed to better characterize occupational exposure. These results can be used to identify exposed workers, and to support lung cancer prevention programs within these groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".