Effect of aluminum-fluoride interactions on overall cognitive function of aluminum plant workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundAluminum and fluoride are neurotoxic, and aluminum exposure alone is closely related to the overall cognitive function of operational workers. It is unclear about the effect of aluminum and fluoride interactions on cognitive function.ObjectiveTo evaluate a potential interaction effect of blood aluminum and urinary fluoride on the overall cognitive function of workers working in an aluminum plant.MethodsUsing cluster sampling, 230 workers in the electrolysis workshop of an aluminum group company in Shanxi Province were selected, and plasma aluminum concentrations were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) and urinary fluoride by ion-selective electrode. The study participants were divided into a low blood aluminum group and a high blood aluminum group according to the median (M) of blood aluminum concentration, and a low urinary fluoride group and a high urinary fluoride group by a predetermined cutoff point (2.160 mg·L−1). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Beijing (MoCA-BJ) was used to assess overall cognitive function of the workers. Logistic regression model was used to analyze the relationship between blood aluminum, urinary fluoride, and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), including multiplicative interaction analysis and correlation analysis; R language was used to fit an additive interaction model of blood aluminum and urinary fluoride on MCI and to calculate synergy index (S), relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI), and attributable proportion due to interaction (API).ResultsAmong the 230 operational workers, the median blood aluminum concentration (P25, P75) was 40.11 (25.16, 58.89) µg·L−1, and there were 104 cases of abnormal urinary fluoride, with an abnormality rate of 45.2%. There was a multiplicative interaction (OR=7.783, 95%CI: 1.377, 43.991) and no additive interaction (RERI=0.030, 95%CI: −0.498, 0.559; API=0.018, 95%CI: −0.279, 0.316; S=1.049, 95%CI: 0.519, 2.118) for the effect between blood aluminum and urinary fluoride on overall cognitive function of the workers. The logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of MCI was 12.105 (95%CI: 2.802, 52.287) times higher in workers with both high blood aluminum and high urinary fluoride than in those with low blood aluminum and low urinary fluoride, after adjusting for selected influencing factors.ConclusionOccupational exposure related high blood aluminum and high urinary fluoride are risk factors for cognitive dysfunction, and the coexistence of both indicators increases the risk of MCI in workers with occupational aluminum exposure, with a multiplicative interaction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".