MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787310251

Determination of Cadmium, Lead, Nickel and Zinc in Hair Cream Products on the Nigerian Market

2018· article· en· W2787310251 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Omali I.C Paul, Casimir Emmanuel Gimba, Stephen Eyije Abechi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournals & Books Hosting (International Knowledge Sharing Platform) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadmiumHeavy metalsCosmeticsZincHair careNickelChemistryToxicologyEnvironmental chemistryMetallurgyMaterials scienceBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, heavy metals like Pb, Cd, Ni and Zn were quantitatively estimated using AAS. The results indicate that among the toxic heavy metals, Pb, Ni and Pb were exceeding the Health Canada permissible limit fixed for hair creams in most of the hair cream samples, but Cadmium was found appreciably well below the permissible limit. At 95% confidence level, p < 0.05, there is a significant difference in the values of the concentration of heavy metals among the hair cream samples used in this study, except for Cadmium concentrations which at this confidence level, p > 0.05, has no significant difference. In conclusion, enforcement of strict and separate regulatory guidelines and promotion of Good Analytical Practice (GAP) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) is suggested for hair cream cosmetics by Health Canada and other regulatory agencies in Nigeria. This study presents the status of heavy metals in marketed hair cream cosmetic formulations and also provides a simple and convenient AAS method which can effectively be adopted at Industrial level for the quality control and standardization of hair care cosmetic preparations and other related products. Keywords: Hair cream cosmetic, Heavy metals, AAS, GAP, GMP

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournals & Books Hosting (International Knowledge Sharing Platform)Same topicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal PlantsFrench-language works237,207