MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discovering Chemicals of Emerging Arctic Concern: Application of New Analytical Approaches to Human Biomonitoring

2018· article· en· W2908674440 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Ayotte, Pierre Dumas

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomonitoringEnvironmental chemistryHuman healthEnvironmental scienceArcticPollutantPesticideChemistryChemical compoundBiologyEnvironmental healthEcologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different analytical strategies are used to discover chemicals of emerging concern in the Arctic. While traditional targeted analyses allow for the identification and quantification of chemicals with a priori knowledge of their presence, semi-targeted and untargeted analyses also permit samples obtained in the framework of human biomonitoring studies to be screened for the presence of unknown or unsuspected pollutants. We recently applied these different analytical strategies to human biomonitoring studies conducted in various regions of the Arctic. Chemical families targeted in plasma samples include polychlorinated biphenyls and chlorinated pesticides, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans as well as perfluorinated compounds. Targeted interrogation of the non polar purified extracts revealed the presence of chlorobenzenes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated naphthalenes, polychlorinated terphenylenes, short-chain chlorinated paraffins and natural halogenated compounds. Through untargeted analyses of extracts, thousands of entities are detected. Chemometric methods such as Kendrick mass defect plot and isotopic pattern detection can be used to attribute unknowns to the proper chemical family and facilitate compound identification. These innovative strategies will help identifying chemicals of emerging Arctic concern that should be included in future biomonitoring studies and considered for inclusion under the Stockholm Convention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207