MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387450442 · doi:10.3390/safety9040071

Occupational Hearing Loss Associated with the Combined Exposure of Solvents and Noise: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4387450442 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSafety · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province
KeywordsOdds ratioConfidence intervalHearing lossMeta-analysisNoise (video)Absolute threshold of hearingNoise-induced hearing lossMedicineAudiologySolvent exposureNoise exposureOccupational exposureInternal medicineEnvironmental healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To analyze the predominant frequencies of hearing threshold shift and the prevalence of hearing loss related to the co-exposure to noise and solvents. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by retrieving published articles from Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and ProQuest until July 2023. Data were extracted in line with the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality were used to assess the studies’ quality. The meta-analysis was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). I2 and Q statistics were used to prove the heterogeneity. A total of 22 selected studies (9948 workers), six cohort studies and 16 cross-sectional studies were included. The results revealed that 43.7%, 41.3%, and 53.6% of the participants presented with hearing loss due to noise exposure, solvent exposure, and combined exposure to noise and solvent, respectively. The workers exposed to both noise and solvents had a higher risk of hearing loss than those exposed to noise (overall weighted odds ratio [OR]: 1.76) or solvents (overall-weighted OR: 2.02) alone. The poorer hearing threshold in the combined noise and solvents exposure group was mainly at high frequencies (3, 4, 6, and 8 kHz), with a peak of 29.47 dB HL at 6 kHz. The noise-exposed group’s peak hearing threshold was 28.87 dB HL at 4 kHz. The peak hearing threshold of the solvent-exposed group was 28.65 dB HL at 6 kHz. The workers exposed to noise and solvent simultaneously had a higher prevalence of hearing loss than those exposed to solvents. Co-exposure to noise and solvents increases the odds of hearing loss. The dominant hearing threshold changes occurred at 3, 4, 6, and 8 kHz, and the peak value appeared at 6 kHz in workers co-exposed to noise and solvents.

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)0.004
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.267 · 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