MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200230885 · doi:10.1289/ehp9372

Development and Evaluation of a Holistic and Mechanistic Modeling Framework for Chemical Emissions, Fate, Exposure, and Risk

2021· article· en· W4200230885 on OpenAlexaff
Li Li, Alessandro Sangion, Frank Wania, James M. Armitage, Liisa Toose, Lauren Hughes, Jon A. Arnot

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsASL Environmental Sciences (Canada)ARC Resources (Canada)The Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk assessmentLife-cycle assessmentEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)Ranking (information retrieval)Human healthBiomonitoringIndustrial ecologyComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Biochemical engineeringSustainabilityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental healthBusinessEcologyBiologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Large numbers of chemicals require evaluation to determine if their production and use pose potential risks to ecological and human health. For most chemicals, the inadequacy and uncertainty of chemical-specific data severely limit the application of exposure- and risk-based methods for screening-level assessments, priority setting, and effective management. OBJECTIVE: We developed and evaluated a holistic, mechanistic modeling framework for ecological and human health assessments to support the safe and sustainable production, use, and disposal of organic chemicals. METHODS: We consolidated various models for simulating the PROduction-To-EXposure (PROTEX) continuum with empirical data sets and models for predicting chemical property and use function information to enable high-throughput (HT) exposure and risk estimation. The new PROTEX-HT framework calculates exposure and risk by integrating mechanistic computational modules describing chemical behavior and fate in the socioeconomic system (i.e., life cycle emissions), natural and indoor environments, various ecological receptors, and humans. PROTEX-HT requires only molecular structure and chemical tonnage (i.e., annual production or consumption volume) as input information. We evaluated the PROTEX-HT framework using 95 organic chemicals commercialized in the United States and demonstrated its application in various exposure and risk assessment contexts. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent and 97% of the PROTEX-HT human exposure predictions were within one and two orders of magnitude, respectively, of independent human exposure estimates inferred from biomonitoring data. PROTEX-HT supported screening and ranking chemicals based on various exposure and risk metrics, setting chemical-specific maximum allowable tonnage based on user-defined toxicological thresholds, and identifying the most relevant emission sources, environmental media, and exposure routes of concern in the PROTEX continuum. The case study shows that high chemical tonnage did not necessarily result in high exposure or health risks. CONCLUSION: Requiring only two chemical-specific pieces of information, PROTEX-HT enables efficient screening-level evaluations of existing and premanufacture chemicals in various exposure- and risk-based contexts. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9372.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207