MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982095308 · doi:10.1177/0960327108093719

Occupational ototoxicity of <i>n</i> -hexane

2008· review· en· W1982095308 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Adolf Vyskočil, T. Leroux, Ginette Truchon, Martine Gendron, Naïma El Majidi, C. Viau

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman & Experimental Toxicology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travailUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsOtotoxicityAudiologyHexaneHearing lossOccupational exposureToxicologyMedicineEnvironmental healthChemistryInternal medicineBiologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of chemicals to produce hearing loss themselves or to promote noise-induced hearing loss has been reported for some organic solvents. The objective of this study was to review the literature on the effects of low-level exposure to n-hexane on the auditory system and consider its relevance for occupational settings. Both human and animal investigations were evaluated only for realistic exposure concentrations based on the permissible inhalation exposure limits. In Quebec, the time-weighted average exposure value (TWAEV) for 8 h is 50 ppm. In humans, the upper limit for considering ototoxicity data relevant to the occupational exposure situation was set at five times the TWAEV. Animal data were evaluated only for exposure concentrations up to 100 times the TWAEV. There is no convincing evidence of n-hexane-induced hearing loss in workers. In rats, n-hexane seems to affect auditory function; however, the site of these alterations cannot be determined from the present data. Further studies with sufficient data on the exposure of workers to n-hexane are necessary to make a definitive conclusion. In the interim, we recommend considering n-hexane as a possibly ototoxic agent.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman & Experimental ToxicologySame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207