ArticlePloS one2024
Supporting the working life exposome: Annotating occupational exposure for enhanced literature search.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recognition and linking of discontinuous named entities in healthcare: a comparative performance analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An individual's likelihood of developing non-communicable diseases is often influenced by the types, intensities and duration of exposures at work. Job exposure matrices provide exposure estimates associated with different occupations. However, due to their time-consuming expert curation process, job exposure matrices currently cover only a subset of possible workplace exposures and may not be regularly updated. Scientific literature articles describing exposure studies provide important supporting evidence for developing and updating job exposure matrices, since they report on exposures in a variety of occupational scenarios. However, the constant growth of scientific literature is increasing the challenges of efficiently identifying relevant articles and important content within them. Natural language processing methods emulate the human process of reading and understanding texts, but in a fraction of the time. Such methods can increase the efficiency of both finding relevant documents and pinpointing specific information within them, which could streamline the process of developing and updating job exposure matrices. Named entity recognition is a fundamental natural language processing method for language understanding, which automatically identifies mentions of domain-specific concepts (named entities) in documents, e.g., exposures, occupations and job tasks. State-of-the-art machine learning models typically use evidence from an annotated corpus, i.e., a set of documents in which named entities are manually marked up (annotated) by experts, to learn how to detect named entities automatically in new documents. We have developed a novel annotated corpus of scientific articles to support machine learning based named entity recognition relevant to occupational substance exposures. Through incremental refinements to the annotation process, we demonstrate that expert annotators can attain high levels of agreement, and that the corpus can be used to train high-performance named entity recognition models. The corpus thus constitutes an important foundation for the wider development of natural language processing tools to support the study of occupational exposures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.