MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400076147 · doi:10.1093/annweh/wxae035.016

42 Interventions to reduce PAH exposure in wildland firefighters

2024· article· en· W4400076147 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natasha Broznitsky, Tristan Durrad, David W. Kinniburgh, L. Carter Kimble, Andrew Litchy, Mona Shum, Sylvia Tiu, Tanis Zadunayski, Nicola Cherry

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Work Exposures and Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionEnvironmental sciencePsychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wildland firefighters are repeatedly exposed to smoke and particles during increasingly long and fierce wildfire seasons with both inhalation and skin absorption of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Wildfire firefighters do not habitually use respiratory protection and good skin hygiene to reduce exposure through contaminated clothing and equipment can be difficult for those living in camp. We introduced interventions to reduce exposures during the 2019, 2021 and 2023 fire seasons, with urinary 1-hydroxypyrene (1-HP), as the outcome marker for PAH absorption. Secondary outcomes included self-reports of mask wearing and post fire respiratory symptom. Sources of PAH exposure were evaluated by personal sampling pumps and skin wipes. A total of 281 firefighters from the western Canadian provinces of Alberta and British Columbia took part over the three fire seasons. Interventions in 2019 and 2021 addressed both skin hygiene and mask wearing: the 2023 intervention compares the effects of three types of mask, half-face with P100 cartridges fire mask and mesh mask. Data collection for the 2023 season has been completed and analysis is in progress, with results expected early in 2023. Data from previous seasons have shown a strong relation between ambient air and skin wipe PAHs and urinary 1-HP, with lower than predicted values in those randomly allocated to wear a mask. A minority of those allocated masks wore them little or not at all, citing discomfort and difficulties carrying out their tasks. The 2023 season data will give clearer indication of the type of mask most efficient and acceptable.

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)0.002
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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Work Exposures and HealthSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207