MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138187464

Determination Of Some Heavy Metals In Selected Cosmetic Products Sold At Iraqi Markets

2020· article· en· W3138187464 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews in Pharmacy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHeavy Metals in Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadmiumLipstickArsenicCosmeticsHeavy metalsAtomic absorption spectroscopyEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceToxicologyChemistryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The content of arsenic, lead and cadmium in different items of cosmetics was estimated using flame atomic absorption spectrometry. Twenty samples with four brands (lipstick, foundation, eyeliner and eyeshadow) were chosen from cosmetic stores in Anbar, Iraq. After they have been analyzed, The results revealed that the level of lead in the lipstick, foundation, eyeliner and eyeshadow was within the range of 3.16 - 9.47 , 1.05 – 9.47 , 3.16 – 8.00 and 6.84 – 9.68 μg.g-1 , respectively. The content of lead and cadmium in items used is lower than the permissible limits according to a health Canada establishment. While the arsenic concentration in all items used in this study is higher than the permissible limits according to a health Canada establishment.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.255 · 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