MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157636117 · doi:10.1186/1476-069x-12-69

Science and policy on endocrine disrupters must not be mixed: a reply to a “common sense” intervention by toxicology journal editors

2013· editorial· en· W2157636117 on OpenAlexaff
Åke Bergman, Anna‐Maria Andersson, Georg Becher, Martin van den Berg, Bruce Blumberg, Poul Bjerregaard, Carl‐Gustaf Bornehag, Riana Bornman, Ingvar Brandt, Jayne V. Brian, Stephanie C. Casey, Paul Fowler, Héloïse Frouin‐Mouy, Linda C. Giudice, Taisen Iguchi, Ulla Hass, Susan Jobling, Anders Juul, Karen A. Kidd, Andreas Kortenkamp, Monica Lind, Olwenn Martin, Derek C. G. Muir, Roseline Ochieng, Nicolás Olea, Leif Norrgren, Erik Ropstad, Peter S. Ross, Christina Rudén, Martin Scheringer, Niels E. Skakkebæk, Olle Söder, Carlos Sonnenschein, Ana M. Soto, Shanna H. Swan, Jorma Toppari, Charles R. Tyler, Laura N. Vandenberg, Anne Marie Vinggaard, Karin Wiberg, R. Thomas Zoeller

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health · 2013
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Cancer InstituteStockholms Universitet
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MedicineToxicologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The "common sense" intervention by toxicology journal editors regarding proposed European Union endocrine disrupter regulations ignores scientific evidence and well-established principles of chemical risk assessment. In this commentary, endocrine disrupter experts express their concerns about a recently published, and is in our considered opinion inaccurate and factually incorrect, editorial that has appeared in several journals in toxicology. Some of the shortcomings of the editorial are discussed in detail. We call for a better founded scientific debate which may help to overcome a polarisation of views detrimental to reaching a consensus about scientific foundations for endocrine disrupter regulation in the EU.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations69
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental HealthSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207