Is Urinary Chromium Specific to Hexavalent Chromium Exposure in the Presence of Co-exposure to Other Chromium Compounds? A Biomonitoring Study in the Electroplating Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Electroplating processes are widely used in metal industries to improve the resistance properties of manufactured metal parts. Workers in this industry are potentially exposed both to hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) and to other chromium compounds [mostly trivalent chromium (Cr(III))], due to the use of chromic acid baths. The goal of this study was to validate urinary chromium as a Cr(VI) exposure biomarker in the presence of exposure to other chromium compounds. METHODS: A biomonitoring study consisted in monitoring airborne chromium exposure and urinary chromium for one working week in 93 workers from nine electroplating companies. Chromium concentrations were measured in all urinations of each volunteer for the working week. Individual airborne soluble and insoluble Cr(VI) as well as Cr(III) concentrations were measured for all of the shifts of the week. The main statistical analysis consisted in modelling, in a Bayesian framework, the pre- and post-shift urinary chromium as a function of airborne Cr(III) and airborne Cr(VI), taking into account the day of the week and the time of collection of the urines (pre- or post-shift). RESULTS: Preliminary descriptions showed an increase in pre-shift urinary chromium during the working week. The model showed an increase in urinary chromium over the shift related to the shift-specific airborne Cr(VI) concentration as well as an increasing trend over the week and a relationship with the mean weekly Cr(VI) thought to reflect chronic exposure. Taking into account the Cr(VI) exposure, there was no evidence of an effect of Cr(III) exposure on urinary chromium. A biological limit value (BLV) was derived from the French occupational exposure limit for Cr(VI) of 1 µg m-3 and was estimated at between 1.9 and 2.6 µg g-1 creatinine for a urinary sample collected at the end of the shift on the last working day of the week. CONCLUSIONS: In the present context of mixed exposure to Cr(III) and Cr(VI) in electroplating, this study showed that urinary chromium depended only on airborne Cr(VI) concentrations, which justifies using a BLV for assessing workers' exposure. The estimated BLV was close to the recommended French BLV, which is 1.8 µg g-1 creatinine, in the electroplating industry.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".