MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2335858918 · doi:10.20381/ruor-3269

Triclosan: Source Attribution, Urinary Metabolite Levels and Temporal Variability in Exposure Among Pregnant Women in Canada

2013· dissertation· en· W2335858918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lorelle Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriclosanMetaboliteAttributionUrinary systemEnvironmental healthMedicineObstetricsPhysiologyPsychologyInternal medicineSocial psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To measure urinary triclosan levels and their variability across pregnancy, and to identify sources of triclosan exposure among Canadian pregnant women. METHODS: Single spot and serial urine samples, as well as consumer product use information were collected across pregnancy and post-partum from 80 healthy pregnant women in Ottawa. Analyses included descriptives, linear mixed effects and parametric trend modeling, and surrogate category analysis. RESULTS: Triclosan was detected in 87% of maternal urine samples (LOD=3.0 µg/L). Triclosan concentrations varied by time of day of urine collection (p=0.0006), season of sampling (p=0.019), and parity (p=0.038). Triclosan was included in 4% of all personal care products used by participants; 89% of these triclosan products were varying brands of toothpaste and hand soaps. CONCLUSION: This study provided the first data on temporal variability urinary triclosan levels, and on source attribution data in Canadian pregnant women. Results will assist with population-specific exposure assessment strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.292
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)→Same topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals→French-language works237,207→