MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241393308 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.8943

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products and their effects on humans

2018· article· en· W4241393308 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alex Neumann

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental impact of pharmaceuticals and personal care productsHazardous wastePopulationConsumption (sociology)Sewage treatmentBusinessPersonal careWastewaterWaste managementEnvironmental healthEnvironmental scienceNatural resource economicsMedicineEnvironmental engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased use of Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCP’s) has led to an increase in many population health problems. In 1997, 15–50 % of women had developed breasts by the age of 8. Ten years prior to this, breast development by the age of 8 was uncommon. There are certain researchers who believe that this may be linked to the pharmaceuticals humans are consuming.Wastewater treatment plants are a significant gateway by which pharmaceuticals enter the water supply. Many pharmaceuticals find themselves in wastewater treatment plants, however the plants do not target these specific chemicals for treatment. As a result, they are released into the surrounding bodies of water, and accumulate in aquatic animals. When water treatment plants take water from the bodies of water and distribute it for human consumption, humans consume these chemicals.Many techniques for removing the pharmaceuticals have been tested, but there is still much uncertainty as to which are effective methods. The potential hazards associated with these chemicals are still uncertain, but the current evidence is indicating that it is very likely that these chemicals can be very hazardous.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsFrench-language works237,207