Defining the Scope of Exposome Studies and Research Needs from a Multidisciplinary Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of the exposome was introduced over 15 years ago to reflect the important role that the environment exerts on health and disease. While originally viewed as a call-to-arms to develop more comprehensive exposure assessment methods applicable at the individual level and throughout the life course, the scope of the exposome has now expanded to include the associated biological response. In order to explore these concepts, a workshop was hosted by the Gunma University Initiative for Advanced Research (GIAR, Japan) to discuss the scope of exposomics from an international and multidisciplinary perspective. This Global Perspective is a summary of the discussions with emphasis on (1) top-down, bottom-up, and functional approaches to exposomics, (2) the need for integration and standardization of LC- and GC-based high-resolution mass spectrometry methods for untargeted exposome analyses, (3) the design of an exposomics study, (4) the requirement for open science workflows including mass spectral libraries and public databases, (5) the necessity for large investments in mass spectrometry infrastructure in order to sequence the exposome, and (6) the role of the exposome in precision medicine and nutrition to create personalized environmental exposure profiles. Recommendations are made on key issues to encourage continued advancement and cooperation in exposomics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".