Review of the state of the art of human biomonitoring for chemical substances and its application to human exposure assessment for food safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human biomonitoring (HBM) measures the levels of substances in body fluids and tissues. Many countries have conducted HBM studies, yet little is known about its application towards chemical risk assessment, particularly in relation to food safety. Therefore a literature search was performed in several databases and conference proceedings for 2002 – 2014. Definitions of HBM and biomarkers, HBM techniques and requirements, and the possible application to the different steps of risk assessment were described. The usefulness of HBM for exposure assessment of chemical substances from food source, and for the implementation of a systematic Post Market Monitoring (PMM) approach for regulated chemical substances was evaluated. An inventory of HBM programmes provides detailed information about study design, analytical methods, reference values (RV) and biomarkers used. Environmental monitoring and associations between HBM values and food, as well as coverage of substances and remaining deficits are highlighted. The review of study results provides information on emerging chemicals, higher exposed and particularly vulnerable populations. Conclusions: HBM can bring added value for chemical risk assessment in food safety areas (namely exposure assessment), and for the implementation of a systematic PMM approach. But further work needs to be done to improve usability. Major deficits are the lack of HBM guidance values on a considerable number of substance groups, for which health based guidance values (HBGVs) have been developed, insufficient knowledge regarding exposure sources, and incomplete dietary intake assessment. Recommendations: We recommend to foster development of HBM based guidance values and validated analytical methods/BMs, stronger inclusion of substances of interest for EFSA in European surveys, expanded monitoring of highly exposed and vulnerable subgroups, uptake of EFSA guidance concerning dietary intake assessment, as well as biobanking, surveillance synergies and targeted research, and an EU wide collaborative approach to support the future use of HBM in PMM.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".