A population-based case-control study of breast cancer and active smoking and environmental tobacco smoke among postmenopausal women in Montreal, Canada /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This population-based multi-centered case-control study of incident postmenopausal breast cancer was carried out in Montreal. Case subjects included all incident histologically confirmed breast cancer among postmenopausal women, age 51--75 years, diagnosed in 1996 and 1997 in all major hospitals. Control subjects had other histologically-confirmed sites of cancer from the same hospital, and were approximately frequency-matched by age to the case subjects. Detailed information was obtained on active smoking and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in the home before the age of 18 and in the workplace as an adult. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) between the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer and various indices of smoking and exposure to ETS. The OR for breast cancer among women with exposure to active smoking only was 0.71 (9596 CI: 0.34--1.48), for early exposure to ETS only, the OR was 1.09 (95% CI: 0.65--1.85), and for occupational exposure to ETS only, the OR was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.53--1.90). When occupational and early exposures to ETS were combined, the OR was 1.40 (95% CI: 0.81--2.40). In summary, I found no associations between the incidence of postmenopausal breast cancer and active smoking or exposure to ETS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".