Estimating children's exposure to toxic elements in contaminated toys and children's jewelry via saliva mobilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children's potential for exposure to potentially toxic elements in contaminated jewelry and toys via mouth contact has not yet been fully evaluated. Various toys and jewelry (metallic toys and jewelry [MJ], plastic toys, toys with paint or coating, and brittle/pliable toys; n = 32) were tested using the saliva extraction (mouthing) compartment of the DIN and RIVM bioaccessibility protocols to assess As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb, and Se mobilization via saliva. Total concentrations of As, Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Sb were found elevated in analyzed samples. Four metals were mobilized to saliva from 16 MJ in significant quantities (>1 μg for highly toxic Cd and Pb, >10 μg for Cu and Ni). Bioaccessible concentrations and hazard index values for Cd exceeded limit values, for young children between 6 mo- and 3 yr-old and according to both protocols. Total and bioaccessible metal concentrations were different and not always correlated, encouraging the use of bioaccessibility for more accurate hazard assessments. Bioaccessibility increased with increasing extraction time. Overall, the risk from exposure to toxic elements via mouthing was high only for Cd and for MJ. Further research on children's exposure to toxic elements following ingestion of toy or jewelry material is recommended.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".