MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077057725 · doi:10.1021/jf803213g

Levels of Bisphenol A in Canned Soft Drink Products in Canadian Markets

2009· article· en· W2077057725 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xu‐Liang Cao, Jeannette Corriveau, Svetlana Popović

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft drinkFood scienceBisphenol ABusinessChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The method developed previously for the determination of bisphenol A (BPA) in liquid infant formula was adapted and validated for determination of BPA in soft drink products. This method was based on solid phase extraction and derivatization with acetic anhydride followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in selected-ion monitoring mode. The average method detection limit was 0.045 microg/L for a 10 mL sample. The average extraction recoveries were 101 and 99.9% obtained with seven different soft drink products spiked with BPA at 0.5 and 2.5 microg/L, respectively. Good repeatability of the method was observed with replicate analyses of seven different soft drinks; relative standard deviations ranged from 1.3 to 6.6%. This method was used to analyze samples of 72 canned soft drink products for BPA. Except for three products from which BPA-d16 could not be recovered at all due to interference of product compositions (e.g., quinine hydrochloride in tonic water), BPA was detected in samples of all the other products at levels ranging from 0.032 to 4.5 microg/L. About 75% of the products had BPA levels of <0.5 microg/L, and 85% of the products had BPA levels of <1 microg/L. Exposure to BPA through consumption of canned soft drink products is low; dietary intake of BPA was estimated at 0.027 microg/kg of body weight/day on the basis of the consumption of one canned soft drink with the highest BPA level (4.5 microg/L) for an adult with a 60 kg body weight, well below the provisional tolerable daily intake of 25 microg/kg of body weight/day established by Health Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations150
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207