MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400075911 · doi:10.1093/annweh/wxae035.095

244 Implementing changes to protect workers from exposures to hazardous drugs

2024· article· en· W4400075911 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Arnold, Hugh Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Work Exposures and Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardous wasteEnvironmental healthBusinessOccupational safety and healthMedicineWaste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hazardous drugs (HD) present a complex exposure problem within healthcare facilities whereby nursing, pharmacy and other staff are chronically exposed to low-levels of HDs via contaminated surfaces throughout pharmacies and clinical settings. Many of these drugs are designated as ALARA substances (reproductive toxins and/or carcinogens); exposures to unknown mixtures or cleaning agent reaction by-products may also occur but have been poorly characterized. There is a lack of health-based surface-OELs against which to benchmark exposures. Despite increased awareness of HD exposures and promotion of safe handling measures, surface levels of HD have plateaued over the last decade. New, collaborative approaches are needed to reduce environmental contamination of HD that contribute to exposures among healthcare workers and staff. We introduce a new approach involving a broad, collaborative, system-wide program based on social dialogue models that brings all parties (e.g., employees/unions, employers, scientists and regulators) together to work on a common goal (e.g., HD exposure reduction) in a collaborative manner that is evidence-based (e.g., surveillance data) that have been successfully implemented in Europe, and an embedded quantitative exposure assessment strategy that uses “hygienic guidance values” (HGV) in the absence of surface OELS. This HGV-based surveillance strategy provides key operational details to the user and also provides target performance levels (through HGV rather than OELs). This approach offers support for a quantified ALARA response, as an HGV approach can encourage measured and continual improvement (i.e., exposure reductions) over time, and centers on a continuous improvement paradigm.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Work Exposures and HealthSame topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207