MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168713197 · doi:10.1177/1091581810380147

Tissue Deposition of the Insect Repellent DEET and the Sunscreen Oxybenzone From Repeated Topical Skin Applications in Rats

2010· article· en· W2168713197 on OpenAlexafffund
Daryl J. Fediuk, Tao Wang, Joshua E. Raizman, Fiona E. Parkinson, Xiaochen Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Toxicology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDEETInsect repellentToxicityIn vivoToxicokineticsPharmacologyChemistryToxicologyMedicineBiologyPathologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET) and sunscreen oxybenzone are capable of enhancing skin permeation of each other when applied simultaneously. We carried out a cellular study in rat astrocytes and neurons to assess cell toxicity of DEET and oxybenzone and a 30-day study in Sprague-Dawley rats to characterize skin permeation and tissue disposition of the compounds. Cellular toxicity occurred at 1 µg/mL for neurons and 7-day treatment for astrocytes and neurons. DEET and oxybenzone permeated across the skin to accumulate in blood, liver, and brain after repeated topical applications. DEET disappeared from the application site faster than oxybenzone. Combined application enhanced the disposition of DEET in liver. No overt sign of behavioral toxicity was observed from several behavioral testing protocols. It was concluded that despite measurable disposition of the study compounds in vivo, there was no evidence of neurotoxicological deficits from repeated topical applications of DEET, oxybenzone, or both.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations34
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ToxicologySame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207