Silicone wristbands integrate dermal and inhalation exposures to semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Silicone wristbands are being increasingly used to assess human exposure to semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs). However, it is unclear what exposure pathways wristbands integrate. To test the hypothesis that wristbands integrate inhalation and dermal exposures, we measured 38 chemicals from four compound groups (PAHs, PBDEs, nBFRs, and OPEs) in silicone wristbands and brooches, active air samples (Occupational Safety and Health Administration Versatile Sampler or OVS cartridge), and hand wipes from 10 adults during a 72-hour period. Phenanthrene, BDE-47, 2‑ethylhexyl 2,3,4,5‑tetrabromobenzoate (EHTBB), tris[(2R)‑1‑chloro‑2‑propyl] phosphate (TCIPP), and tris(1,3‑dichloro‑2‑propyl) phosphate (TDCIPP) were the predominant compounds in all four matrices. In a linear regression analysis, the compound levels in OVS were positively associated with those in wristbands and brooches for nBFRs and OPEs, but not for PAHs and PBDEs. The compound levels in wristbands were positively associated with those in hand wipes and brooches for all chemicals. The regressions between the levels in wristbands and OVS or brooches combined with the levels in hand wipes showed stronger, supporting the hypothesis that wristbands captured inhalation and dermal exposure pathways.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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 it