Effect of Occupational Exposure to Radar Radiation on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Microwave radiation is one of the most growing environmental workplace factors that exposes too many workers in the various workplaces. Regard to concerns about cancer incidence in these workers and lack of \nsystematic or meta-analytic studies about this object, so, we conducted a meta-analysis to acquire an understanding of the association between cancer risk and occupational exposure to radar radiation. Methods: A systematic search was carried out on case-control, cohort and clinical control trial studies that published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus and Google scholar databases that accomplished from March 2017 to March 2018 and updated on 30 September, 2018 in English and Persian articles without time limit in publication date. Keywords were selected based on PICO principle and collected from MeSH database. After removal of duplicated studied, taking into inclusion and exclusion criteria, the process of screening was carried out and data were extracted after preparation of the full text of included articles. Article collection was completed by manually searching for a reference list of eligible studies. For quality assessment of included studies, Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used. Results: a total of 533 studies was found in the first step of literature search, only 6 were included with 53,008 sample size according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Estimated pooled random effects size analysis showed no significant increasing effect of occupational exposure to radar radiation on mortality rate (MR=0.81, 95%CI: 0.78, 0.83) and relative risk (RR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.75, 0.99, P <0.0001) of cancer with a significant heterogeneity between the selected studies. Conclusions: \nIn conclusion, the results of this meta-analysis study have shown no significant increase in overall mortality ratio and cancer risk ratio from occupational exposure to the radar frequency of workers. But, these results are not conclusive. As regards to some limitation such as fewer numbers of included studies, lack of data about exposure characterizations and demographic characterizations in this meta-analysis, this result is not certain and conclusive. It is recommended to \nconduct future studies.
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 | 0.016 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.047 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".