MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

8219149 Exposure to Ionizing Radiation and Site-Specific Cancer Risks in Nuclear Power Plant Workers: Findings from an Updated Record Linkage of the Canadian National Dose Registry

2025· article· en· W4414965299 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick Hinton, Laura Andrea Rodríguez-Villamizar, Philippe Prince, Tim Prendergast, T. Minh, Paul A. Demers, Cheryl Peters, Lydia B. Zablotska, Paul J. Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoisson regressionCancerCumulative incidenceIonizing radiationCumulative doseRelative riskIncidence (geometry)CohortProstate cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Ionizing radiation is a human carcinogen, but there are uncertainties about cancer risks from long-term exposure at low-doses. Large-scale occupational studies provide opportunities to estimate these risks, yet to date, most have relied on mortality outcomes to do so. This study sought to characterize the risk of incident cancers in relation to cumulative occupational exposure to radiation among nuclear power plant workers in the recently extended follow-up of the Canadian National Dose Registry. Methods This retrospective cohort study comprised 75,350 Canadians employed between 1945 and 2010. Record linkage to national cancer incidence and mortality registries was performed to identify incident cancers between 1969 and 2010. Annual whole-body doses to internal and external ionizing radiation, expressed as effective doses, were determined from personal dosimetry records. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated to compare site-specific cancer rates with the Canadian general population, while Poisson regression models estimated linear excess relative risks (ERR) per 100 millisieverts (mSv) of cumulative exposure. Results A total of 4,370 first primary cancers were identified during the follow-up. The mean cumulative effective dose was 12.0 mSv (SD = 30.42 mSv) at the end of follow-up. Elevated SIRs were observed for malignant melanoma, prostate, and colon cancer, while that for lung cancer incidence was less than one. The ERR estimates were positive, though not statistically significant, for prostate cancer (ERR/100mSv = 0.12; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.29) and melanoma (ERR/100mSv = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.23, 0.87), whereas an inverse association was exhibited for lung cancer. For prostate cancer, age at first exposure was found to modify the risk, with those first exposed from 55 years of age onwards most vulnerable. Conclusion Our findings provide some evidence that low-dose protracted ionizing radiation exposure increases the risk of prostate cancer and malignant melanoma. Funding This project was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Funding Application #: 487910).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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 topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207