EXPOsOMICS: final policy workshop and stakeholder consultation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The final meeting of the EXPOsOMICS project "Final Policy Workshop and Stakeholder Consultation" took place 28-29 March 2017 to present the main results of the project and discuss their implications both for future research and for regulatory and policy activities. This paper summarizes presentations and discussions at the meeting related with the main results and advances in exposome research achieved through the EXPOsOMICS project; on other parallel research initiatives on the study of the exposome in Europe and in the United States and their complementarity to EXPOsOMICS; lessons learned from these early studies on the exposome and how they may shape the future of research on environmental exposure assessment; and finally the broader implications of exposome research for risk assessment and policy development on environmental exposures. The main results of EXPOsOMICS in relation to studies of the external exposome and internal exposome in relation to both air pollution and water contaminants were presented as well as new technologies for environmental health research (adductomics) and advances in statistical methods. Although exposome research strengthens the scientific basis for policy development, there is a need in terms of showing added value for public health to: improve communication of research results to non-scientific audiences; target research to the broader landscape of societal challenges; and draw applicable conclusions. Priorities for future work include the development and standardization of methodologies and technologies for assessing the external and internal exposome, improved data sharing and integration, and the demonstration of the added value of exposome science over conventional approaches in answering priority policy questions.
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 | 0.157 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.036 |
| Research integrity | 0.065 | 0.043 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.021 |
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".