MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209774598 · doi:10.1515/reveh-2021-0074

Electronic waste exposure and DNA damage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3209774598 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueReviews on Environmental Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMeta-analysisDNA damageEnvironmental scienceMedicineDNAChemistryBiochemistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate processing and disposal of electronic waste (e-waste) expose workers and surrounding populations to hazardous chemicals, including clastogens and aneugens. Recently, considerable literature has grown around e-waste recycling, associated chemical exposures and intermediate health outcomes, including DNA damage. Micronuclei (MN) frequency has been widely used as a biomarker to investigate DNA damage in human populations exposed to genotoxic agents. We conducted a systematic review of published studies to assess DNA damage in e-waste-exposed populations and performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the association between e-waste exposure and DNA damage. METHODS: This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement checklist. Articles published in English from January 2000 through December 2020 investigating the associations between e-waste exposure and DNA damage were retrieved from the following three major databases: MEDLINE, ProQuest, and Scopus. Studies that reported the use of MN assay as a biomarker of DNA damage were included for meta-analysis. Studies that also reported other DNA damage biomarkers such as chromosomal aberrations, comet assay biomarkers, 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), telomere length, apoptosis rate were reported using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 20 publications were included in this review, of which seven studies were within the occupational setting, and the remaining 13 studies were ecological studies. The review found six biomarkers of DNA damage (micronuclei, comets assay parameters (tail length, % tail DNA, tail moment, and olive tail moment), 8-OHdG, telomere length, apoptosis rate and chromosomal aberrations) which were assessed using seven different biological matrices (buccal cells, blood, umbilical cord blood, placenta, urine and semen). Most studies showed elevated levels of DNA damage biomarkers among e-waste exposed populations than in control populations. The most commonly used biomarkers were micronuclei frequency (n=9) in peripheral blood lymphocytes or buccal cells and 8-OHdG (n=7) in urine. The results of the meta-analysis showed that electronic waste recycling has contributed to an increased risk of DNA damage measured using MN frequency with a pooled estimate of the standardized mean difference (SMD) of 2.30 (95% CI: 1.36, 3.24, p<0.001) based on 865 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, evidence from this systematic review with meta-analysis suggest that occupational and non-occupational exposure to e-waste processing is associated with increased risk of DNA damage measured through MN assay and other types of DNA damage biomarkers. However, more studies from other developing countries in Africa, Latin America, and South Asia are needed to confirm and increase these results' generalizability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.300 · 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