MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

International approaches to hazard assessment and classification of endocrine disruptors

2021· article· en· W4206828863 on OpenAlex
Khalidya Khizbulaevna Khamidulina, Е. В. Тарасова, Irina V. Zamkova, E. V. Dorofeeva, Ilgiz N. Araslanov, Yuliya Yurevna Aniskova, А. С. Проскурина, Dinara Nurullaevna Rabikova

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

VenueHygiene and Sanitation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural safety and regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocrine systemScopusHazardHarmEndocrine disruptorEuropean unionMEDLINEEnvironmental healthMedicinePolitical scienceBusinessBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. The problems of the impact of endocrine disruptors on human health and the environment are of serious concern today at the international, regional and national levels. Although the first mention about an ability of a substance to harm the endocrine system back in the 60 th of the XX century, the issues of substantiating the criteria for classifying it as endocrine disruptors, identifying potential disruptors of the endocrine system, assessing and classifying their danger to health and the environment with the purpose of further regulation. The aim of the study. To study of world experience in classifying chemical compounds as endocrine disruptors; creating a list of chemicals circulating on the territory of the Russian Federation that can potentially affect the endocrine system; selection of criteria for their classification according to the degree of hazard. The material for the analysis was literature sources from the bibliographic databases Web of Science, MedLine, EMBASE, Global Health, PubMed, Scopus, RSCI. The documents of international organizations, the European Union, the USA, Canada, Japan, India and other states on the hazard assessment, classification and regulation of endocrine disruptors have been studied and analyzed. Considering international experience, the criteria for classifying chemical compounds as endocrine disruptors have been substantiated, including three main components: an adverse effect on the body, an endocrine mechanism of action, and a biological relationship between endocrine activity and an adverse effect. A comparative analysis of the hazard classifications of endocrine disruptors developed by the EU and India showed to be based on the principles of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Hazards of Chemicals and Mixtures. Considering the limited scientific knowledge about substances capable of destroying the endocrine system, it is advisable to introduce class 3 for substances with limited data obtained in “in vitro” experiments in invertebrates tests. Conclusion. International approaches to the selection, assessment and classification of chemicals that have a potential impact on the endocrine system will allow for the first time in the Russian Federation to form a national list of endocrine disruptors, to identify substances that are the priority in terms of hazard and degree of risk for making relevant management decisions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.178 · 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