MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

8287530 Radon at work: exposure levels and determinants in various quebec workplaces

2025· article· en· W4414852774 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sabrina Gravel, Maude Pomerleau, Tony Wong, Patrick Poulin, France Labrèche

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadonRadon exposureWork (physics)Radon gasOccupancyHydrology (agriculture)Public health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Objective</h3> Radon is a naturally occurring lung carcinogen, which may infiltrate buildings and expose the occupants, including workers. The objective of this study is to describe radon exposure in various workplaces, to identify factors associated with exposure, and to highlight levers for preventive action. <h3>Material and Methods</h3> Workplaces of targeted sectors (e.g. municipal services, fish farming, groundwater-fed drinking water production, granite finishing) were recruited in four regions of Québec (Canada); two with a high potential for radon emissions and two with a low potential. We included workplaces with an underground or slab-on-grade work area where workers spend ≥ 4 hours per day. Information was collected on building structure, ventilation, water source, occupancy and company operations. Long-term measurements of radon (3 months) were conducted with Alpha Track AT-100 passive dosimeters, which were deployed by the research team in accordance with Health Canada’s Guide for radon measurements in public buildings. <h3>Results</h3> There were 354 radon measurements in 54 workplaces (57 buildings built between 1877 and 2021). There were on average 7 measurements (ranging from 1 to 28) per workplace. The median sampling period was 109 days (range 92-148 days). Ten buildings had all measurements below the detection limit (15 Bq/m³), and six had at least one measurement above 100 Bq/m³. The highest recorded values were above 1500 Bq/m³, in a fish hatchery. Generalized estimating equations revealed that the presence of naturally occurring radioactive material (underground water source) was the most predictive factor for higher concentrations, regardless of the geographical region. The presence of rammed earth rather than concrete foundations was also associated with higher concentrations. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Most workplaces had radon concentrations well below guidelines. Higher concentrations measured in water treatment facilities and in fish farms raise concern about occupational exposures in these workplaces, which may have been overlooked by occupational health authorities.

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)0.001
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207