MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1562937060 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2001.015

Endocrine Disruption and Human Reproductive Effects: An Overview

2001· article· en· W1562937060 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Warren G. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocrine systemEnvironmental healthReproductive healthHuman healthPopulationEpidemiologyBiologyPhysiologyMedicineEndocrinologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Humans of all ages interact with their environment on a daily basis and are thus exposed to a variety of both man-made and naturally occurring chemicals through the air they breath, the water they drink and the food they eat. The potential for exposure to environmental contaminants to impact the function of the reproductive system and affect normal development of the reproductive tract has become an area of increasing concern at all levels of society. Environment Canada and Health Canada jointly organized a workshop to review the current state of knowledge on endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) and to establish a national science agenda on the scientific assessment of EDCs. This report summarizes the key scientific literature pertaining to the role of EDCs in a number of selected human reproductive/developmental outcomes. Change in the frequency of health outcome trends, epidemiological evidence of an association between the health outcome of concern and exposure to EDCs, and mechanistic evidence of receptor-mediated effects were the criteria used to evaluate the strength of the evidence. While it cannot be concluded that EDCs cause reproductive effects in the general Canadian population, the weight of evidence provides cause for continued concern.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207