MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978376018 · doi:10.1080/10937400601034571

Pesticide Exposures and Developmental Outcomes: The Epidemiological Evidence

2007· review· en· W1978376018 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHealth CanadaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthPesticideEpidemiologyMedicineCausality (physics)Public healthToxicologyBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the advent of DDT as an insecticide in the late 1930s, billions of kilograms of pesticide active ingredient have been sold in North America and around the world. In recent years, there has been a heightened public awareness of pesticides and child health and a number of epidemiologic studies linked pre- and postnatal exposures to pesticides to a number of adverse developmental outcomes, including fetal death, intrauterine growth restriction, preterm birth, and birth defects. Given this, it was felt prudent to critically appraise the evidence for periconceptual pesticide exposures and developmental outcomes. The epidemiological evidence for specific pesticide classes, families, and active ingredients were examined and summarized and recommendations were made for how to improve future studies in order to address the current pitfalls and gaps in the studies in this area. Many of the studies suffered from poor exposure estimation, relying on job title only and/or the exposure category "any pesticide" as a measure of exposure, and there was limited or inadequate evidence to support causality for all associations examined.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.200 · 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