MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109538439 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2020.1842428

Exposure to lead, mercury, styrene, and toluene and hearing impairment: evaluation of dose-response relationships, regulations, and controls

2020· review· en· W3109538439 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ehsan Hemmativaghef

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStyreneTolueneMercury (programming language)Occupational exposureLead exposureEnvironmental healthInhalation exposureAudiologyToxicologyLead (geology)Maximum Allowable ConcentrationEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceMedicineChemistryToxicityOrganic chemistryComputer scienceBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of hearing loss from exposure to ototoxic chemicals is not reflected in occupational exposure limits and most jurisdictions. The aims of this research were to investigate dose-response relationships between exposure to lead, mercury, toluene, and styrene and hearing impairment based on current epidemiological evidence, conduct cross-jurisdictional comparisons, and investigate control measures for exposure to ototoxic chemicals. Ovid Medline and Ovid Embase databases were used to find relevant publications. A total of 86 epidemiological studies met the eligibility criteria for final evaluation. When significant associations between exposure and outcome were identified, exposure levels were evaluated to determine whether No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) could be identified. Cross-jurisdictional comparisons included the U.K., U.S., Canada, and Australia occupational health and safety legislations. The majority of lead (75%), styrene (74%), and toluene (77%) studies showed significantly increased risks of hearing loss from exposure to these substances, although numerous studies on toluene (70%) and styrene (16%) compared auditory function between "solvent mixture" or "noise and solvent mixture" exposed groups and controls and not necessarily on groups exposed to a single agent. Based on five studies, blood lead ranges of 1-1.99 μg/dL to 2.148-2.822 μg/dL were identified as NOAELs while blood lead levels of 2 μg/dL up to 2.823-26.507 μg/dL were identified as LOAELs for hearing loss. Except for general duty clauses, the U.S., Canadian, and Australian jurisdictions have set no enforceable regulations specific to ototoxic chemical exposures. A biological exposure index of 2 μg/dL is recommended for prevention of hearing impairment from lead exposure. Based on Safe Work Australia, noise exposure limits may be reduced to 80 dB(A) for 8 hr. Other recommendations include performing audiometric testing and controlling exposure through all routes of entry.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207