MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1425268590 · doi:10.1289/ehp.1510041

Optimal Exposure Biomarkers for Nonpersistent Chemicals in Environmental Epidemiology

2015· article· en· W1425268590 on OpenAlexaff
Antonia M. Calafat, Matthew P. Longnecker, Holger M. Koch, Shanna H. Swan, Russ Hauser, Lynn R. Goldman, Bruce P. Lanphear, Ruthann A. Rudel, Stephanie M. Engel, Susan L. Teitelbaum, Robin M. Whyatt, Mary S. Wolff

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiomonitoringBiomarkerToxicologyEnvironmental chemistryBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss considerations that are essential when evaluating exposure to nonpersistent, semivolatile environmental chemicals such as phthalates and phenols (e.g., bisphenol A). A biomarker should be chosen to best represent usual personal exposures and not recent, adventitious, or extraneous exposures. Biomarkers should be selected to minimize contamination arising from collection, sampling, or analysis procedures. Pharmacokinetics should be considered; for example, nonpersistent, semivolatile chemicals are metabolized quickly, and urine is the compartment with the highest concentrations of metabolites. Because these chemicals are nonpersistent, knowledge of intraindividual reliability over the biologic window of interest is also required. In recent years researchers have increasingly used blood as a matrix for characterizing exposure to nonpersistent chemicals. However, the biologic and technical factors noted above strongly support urine as the optimal matrix for measuring nonpersistent, semivolatile, hydrophilic environmental agents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations164
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207