MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2047918586 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(13)70020-2

Health effects of exposure to e-waste

2013· letter· en· W2047918586 sur OpenAlexafffund
Marie Noel-Brune, Fiona C Goldizen, María Neira, Martin van den Berg, Nancy Davis Lewis, Malcolm King, William A. Suk, David O. Carpenter, Robert G. Arnold, Peter D. Sly

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Global Health · 2013
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Établissements canadiensCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimon Fraser UniversityInstitute of Indigenous Peoples' Health
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimon Fraser UniversityUniversiteit UtrechtRensselaer Polytechnic InstituteUniversity of QueenslandChildren's Medical Research
Mots-clésScopusElectronic wasteBusinessWaste managementCleaner productionEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental impact assessmentDumpingProduction (economics)Municipal solid wasteEnvironmental healthEnvironmental protectionEngineeringMedicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Discarded electrical and electronic equipment and components, known collectively as e-waste, are the most rapidly increasing sources of waste worldwide.1Lundgren K for the International Labour OfficeThe global impact of e-waste: addressing the challenge. International Labour Office, Geneva2012Google Scholar Most e-waste is disposed of in landfills, but recycling efforts occur to recover valuable materials.2Robinson BH E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental impacts.Sci Total Environ. 2009; 408: 183-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (1253) Google Scholar Exposure to e-waste might occur directly via recycling or indirectly via ecological exposure.2Robinson BH E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental impacts.Sci Total Environ. 2009; 408: 183-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (1253) Google Scholar A large proportion of e-waste is shipped to less developed countries for dumping or recycling.3UN Environment ProgrammeE-waste, volume 1: inventory assessment manual. UN Environment Programme, Nairobi2007Google Scholar Much e-waste recycling occurs in the informal sector, in homes where women and children are engaged in unsafe recycling practices without the benefit or the knowledge of exposure-minimising technology or protective equipment.1Lundgren K for the International Labour OfficeThe global impact of e-waste: addressing the challenge. International Labour Office, Geneva2012Google Scholar High levels of environmental contamination can occur from e-waste recycling, putting residents in surrounding areas at risk of ecological exposure via inhalation or ingestion of contaminated water, air, and food supplies.1Lundgren K for the International Labour OfficeThe global impact of e-waste: addressing the challenge. International Labour Office, Geneva2012Google Scholar In addition to risks of injuries, potential exposures include the original constituents of the equipment, substances added during the recovery process, and substances formed as a result of the recycling process.1Lundgren K for the International Labour OfficeThe global impact of e-waste: addressing the challenge. International Labour Office, Geneva2012Google Scholar, 2Robinson BH E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental impacts.Sci Total Environ. 2009; 408: 183-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (1253) Google Scholar Thus, although the toxicity of the original components might be known, workers and residents are likely to be exposed to complex mixtures of unknown toxicity. Concern about the effects on health of chemical exposure to e-waste and e-waste recycling is increasing despite the paucity of solid research. Reported adverse effects include: fetal loss, prematurity, low birthweight, and congenital malformations; abnormal thyroid function and thyroid development; neurobehavioural disturbances; and genotoxicity.1Lundgren K for the International Labour OfficeThe global impact of e-waste: addressing the challenge. International Labour Office, Geneva2012Google Scholar, 2Robinson BH E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental impacts.Sci Total Environ. 2009; 408: 183-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (1253) Google Scholar However, few direct studies have been undertaken. Children and developing fetuses are particularly susceptible and evidence of adverse effects in early life via ecological exposure is increasing.2Robinson BH E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental impacts.Sci Total Environ. 2009; 408: 183-191Crossref PubMed Scopus (1253) Google Scholar In response to the lack of specific data and little awareness from public health on the effect of e-waste on children's health, the WHO department of Public Health and Environment (PHE) is developing a specific plan of action. This initiative includes raising awareness of and communicating the problem, developing training methods and programmes for health professionals, encouraging specific research about e-waste, and gathering interested stakeholders to move this issue forward. The initiative will be officially launched at the 15th international conference of the Pacific Basin Consortium for the Environment and Health (PBC), to be held at the East-West Center, Honolulu, HI, USA, Sept 24–27, 2013, and continues the collaborative efforts of PHE, the PBC, and the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in children's environmental health.4Suk WA Ruchirawat KM Balakrishnan K et al.Environmental threats to children's health in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific.Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 111: 1340-1347Crossref PubMed Scopus (64) Google Scholar, 5Gavidia T Brune MN McCarty KM et al.Children's environmental health—from knowledge to action.Lancet. 2011; 377: 1134-1136Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (13) Google Scholar The conference is open to the scientific community and others who wish to attend. We declare that we have no conflicts of interest. MN-B and MN are staff members of WHO. They are responsible for the views expressed in this publication, which do not necessarily represent the decisions, policy, or views of WHO.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,051
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,298
Écart entre enseignants0,283 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations63
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Global HealthMême sujetRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesTravaux en français237 207