MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408175982 · doi:10.5124/jkma.2025.68.2.121

Cancer attributable to occupational factors: a focus on primary prevention

2025· article· en· W4408175982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eun Mi Kim, Jeehee Min, Inah Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Korean Medical Association · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary preventionFocus (optics)Primary (astronomy)Environmental healthMedicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Occupational cancers arise from exposure to carcinogenic agents during work activities and represent a significant public health challenge. In Korea, compensation for occupational cancers has been available since 1964, with asbestos related mesothelioma recognized in 1993. Estimating the population attributable fraction (PAF) using national surveys and epidemiological studies is critical for assessing regulatory impact and forecasting future disease burden.Current Concepts: The International Agency for Research on Cancer categorizes carcinogens into distinct groups, and nearly 47 agents have been identified as relevant to occupational exposures. Advanced assessment tools, including job exposure matrices and the CAREX (CARcinogen EXposure) program, have been developed to accurately estimate exposure prevalence across industries. Comparative studies from Korea, the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Italy, and China indicate that the occupational cancer PAF ranges from approximately 1% to 8%. Notably, asbestos, welding fumes, diesel engineexhaust and emerging exposures such as night shift work are consistently recognized as major contributors to occupational cancer risk.Discussion and Conclusion: Although regulatory measures have successfully reduced exposure to several known carcinogens, long latency periods and evolving industrial practices continue to sustain the burden of occupational cancers. Incorporating detailed occupational histories in clinical assessments can facilitate early detection and targeted interventions. Ongoing refinement of exposure estimation methods and international collaboration remain essential for updating PAF calculations. Ultimately, proactive primary prevention and evidence-based regulatory policies are imperative to mitigate the impact of occupational carcinogens on cancer incidence and mortality. These findings underscore the urgency of continuous monitoring and targeted occupational health initiatives.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Korean Medical AssociationSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207