MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113683086 · doi:10.3109/1354750x.2011.604133

Blood lead levels and cumulative blood lead index (CBLI) as predictors of late neurodevelopment in lead poisoned children

2011· article· en· W2113683086 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomarkers · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcMaster University
FundersAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease RegistryNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesGeorgia Clinical and Translational Science AllianceMcMaster UniversityU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsLead (geology)Lead exposureBlood lead levelMedicineLead poisoningPediatricsInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To find the best lead exposure assessment marker for children. METHODS: We recruited 11 children, calculated a cumulative blood lead index (CBLI) for the children, measured their concurrent BLL, assessed their development, and measured their bone lead level. RESULTS: Nine of 11 children had clinically significant neurodevelopment problems. CBLI and current blood lead level, but not the peak lead level, were significantly or marginally negatively associated with the full-scale IQ score. CONCLUSION: Lead exposure at younger age significantly impacts a child's later neurodevelopment. CBLI may be a better predictor of neurodevelopment than are current or peak blood lead levels.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.205 · 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