Objectives To provide direct estimates of risk of cancer after protracted low doses of ionising radiation and to strengthen the scientific basis of radiation protection standards for environmental, occupational, and medical diagnostic exposures. Design Multinational retrospective cohort study of cancer mortality. Setting Cohorts of workers in the nuclear industry in 15 countries. Participants 407 391 workers individually monitored for external radiation with a total follow-up of 5.2 million person years. Main outcome measurements Estimates of excess relative risks per sievert (Sv) of radiation dose for mortality from cancers other than leukaemia and from leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, the main causes of death considered by radiation protection authorities. Results The excess relative risk for cancers other than leukaemia was 0.97 per Sv, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.97. Analyses of causes of death related or unrelated to smoking indicate that, although confounding by smoking may be present, it is unlikely to explain all of this increased risk. The excess relative risk for leukaemia excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia was 1.93 per Sv ( < 0 to 8.47). On the basis of these estimates, 1-2% of deaths from cancer among workers in this cohort may be attributable to radiation. Conclusions These estimates, from the largest study of nuclear workers ever conducted, are higher than, but statistically compatible with, the risk estimates used for current radiation protection standards. The results suggest that there is a small excess risk of cancer, even at the low doses and dose rates typically received by nuclear workers in this study.
To provide direct estimates of cancer risk after low-dose protracted exposure to ionizing radiation, a large-scale epidemiological study of nuclear industry workers was conducted in 15 countries. As part of this study, identification and quantification of errors in historical recorded doses was conducted based on a review of dosimetric practices and technologies in participating facilities. The main sources of errors on doses from "high-energy" photons (100-3000 keV) were identified as the response of dosimeters in workplace exposure conditions and historical calibration practices. Errors related to dosimetry technology and radiation fields were quantified to derive period- and facility-specific estimates of bias and uncertainties in recorded doses. This was based on (1) an evaluation of predominant workplace radiation from measurement studies and dosimetry expert assessment and (2) an estimation of the energy and geometry response of dosimeters used historically in study facilities. Coefficients were derived to convert recorded doses to H(p) (10) and organ dose, taking into account different aspects of the calibration procedures. A parametric, lognormal error structure model was developed to describe errors in doses as a function of facility and time period. Doses from other radiation types, particularly neutrons and radionuclide intake, could not be adequately reconstructed in the framework of the 15-Country Study. Workers with substantial doses from these radiation types were therefore identified and excluded from analyses. Doses from "lower-energy" photons (<100 keV) and from "higher-energy" photons (>3 MeV) were estimated to be small.
Using Swedish micro data, the paper examines the impact of local public services on community choice. The choice of community is modelled as a choice between a discrete set of alternatives. It is found that, given taxes, high spending on child care attracts migrants. Less conclusive results are obtained with respect to the role of spending on education and elderly care. High local taxes deter migrants. Relaxing the independence of the irrelevant alternatives assumption, by estimating a mixed logit model, has a significant impact on the results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.