Monitoring temporal trends of dioxins, organochlorine pesticides and chlorinated paraffins in pooled serum samples collected from Northern Norwegian women: The MISA cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ubiquitous presence of legacy and emerging persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in the environmental matrices poses a potential hazard to the humans and creating public health concerns. The present study aimed to evaluate dioxins, dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and chlorinated paraffins (CPs) concentrations in serum of women (postpartum, pregnant and non-pregnant) from Northern Norway to better understand their exposure and contamination status as well as temporal trends across 2007-2009 (MISA 1) to 2019 (MISA 2). Sixty-two blood samples from the MISA 1 cohort and 38 samples from MISA 2 were randomly selected in this study (n = 100). Ninety samples from postpartum (MISA 1) and pregnant women (MISA 2) were randomly combined into 9 pools, with 9-11 individual samples contributing to each pool keeping the groups of pregnant and postpartum women. Remaining 10 samples from non-pregnant women (MISA 2) were allocated into separate group. Geometric mean, minimum and maximum were used to describe the serum concentrations of pooled POPs in MISA cohort. Mann-Whitney U test and independent sample t-test were applied for trend analysis of blood levels of POPs between MISA 1 and MISA 2. We found the serum concentrations of selected POPs in this study to be at lower range. Serum concentrations of dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) (p = 0.010), polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) (p = 0.002), dioxins-like PCBs (p = 0.001), hexachlorobenzene (HCB) (p < 0.001) and p,p'-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (p,p'-DDE) (p = 0.002) were decreased between the studied time. In contrast, the serum concentrations of medium chain chlorinated paraffins showed an increasing trend between 2007 and 2009 and 2019 (p = 0.019). Our findings report a particular concern of emerging contaminant medium chain chlorinated paraffin exposure to humans. Future observational studies with repeated measurements of chlorinated paraffins in general populations worldwide and large sample size are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".