MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106357716 · doi:10.1351/pac200072061015

A review of human and sub-human primate toxicity of hexachlorobenzene

2000· review· en· W2106357716 on OpenAlexaff
John Jarrell, Ayhan Göçmen

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHexachlorobenzeneToxicityHuman reproductionChemistryPopulationCohortPhysiologyAbortionIncidence (geometry)ToxicologyZoologyPregnancyEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePollutantBiologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The inadvertent exposure of a large cohort of individuals to hexachlorobenzene (HCB) in the mid-1950s in southeastern Turkey remains an environmental disaster that continues to fascinate and provide interesting observations concerning this ubiquitous chemical. A brief history of the exposure is presented with particular reference to the initial presentation of Pembe Yara and Porphyria Cutanea Tarda and later to reproductive performance in humans and sub-human primates. Differential toxicity is present in the oocytes of monkeys, with more severe damage identified in primordial germ cells rather than in growing oocytes. However, this observation did not express itself in women, as there was no increased incidence of premature menopause among those exposed. Germ cell toxicity remains a possible outcome of exposure, however. The serum HCB levels measured in exposed individuals predicted the lifetime risk of spontaneous abortion, not only in exposed individuals but also in the control populations, indicating that a possible population effect is present.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePure and Applied ChemistrySame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207