Exposure of young children to household water lead in the Montreal area (Canada): The potential influence of winter-to-summer changes in water lead levels on children's blood lead concentration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drinking water represents a potential source of lead exposure. The purpose of the present study was to estimate the magnitude of winter-to-summer changes in household water lead levels (WLLs), and to predict the impact of these variations on BLLs in young children. A study was conducted from September, 2009 to March, 2010 in 305 homes, with a follow-up survey carried out from June to September 2011 in a subsample of 100 homes randomly selected. The first 1-L sample was drawn after 5 min of flushing, followed by a further 4 consecutive 1-L samples after 30 min of stagnation. Non-linear regression and general linear mixed models were used for modelling seasonal effects on WLL. The batchrun mode of Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic (IEUBK) model was used to predict the impact of changes in WLL on children's blood lead levels (BLLs). The magnitude of winter-to-summer changes in average concentrations of lead corresponded to 6.55 μg/L in homes served by lead service lines (LSL+ homes) and merely 0.30 μg/L in homes without lead service lines. For stagnant samples, the value reached 10.55 μg/L in 'LSL+ homes' and remained very low (0.36 μg/L) in 'LSL- homes'. The change in the probability of BLLs ≥5 μg/dL due to winter-to-summer changes in WLL was increased from <5% (in winter) to about 20% (in summer) in children aged 0.5-2 years. The likelihood of having BLLs ≥5 μg/dL in young children during warm months was reduced by at least 40% by flushing tap-water.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".