MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318263171 · doi:10.1080/10408444.2022.2128718

Biomarkers for occupational manganese exposure

2022· review· en· W4318263171 on OpenAlexaff
Nataliya A. Karyakina, Natalia S. Shilnikova, N. Farhat, Siva Ramoju, Brandon Cline, Franco Momoli, Donald R. Mattison, Natalie Jensen, Rowan Terrell, Daniel Krewski

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Toxicology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubclinical infectionBiomonitoringMedicineWhole bloodPhysiologyManganeseOccupational exposureInhalation exposureInhalationBiomarkerExposure assessmentEnvironmental healthToxicologyEnvironmental chemistryPathologyInternal medicineChemistryBiologyAnesthesiaBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term inhalation exposure to manganese (Mn) metal or its inorganic compounds can result in manganism or subclinical neurofunctional deficits. Studies have described affected workers in Mn dioxide mining, Mn-containing ore crushing and milling facilities, manufacturing of dry-cell batteries, Mn steel and alloy production plants, and in welders. The objective of this study was to critically review existing evidence on the reliability of potential biomarkers of Mn exposure, specifically the relationship between inhalation exposure to Mn particulates in different occupational settings and Mn concentrations in blood and other biological fluids and tissues, with a particular focus on whole blood as a potentially useful medium for measuring internal tissue dose. We also examined available evidence on the relationship between Mn levels in blood and adverse clinical and subclinical neurotoxic outcomes. Three bibliographic databases were searched for relevant studies and identified references were screened by two independent reviewers. Of the 6338 unique references identified, 76 articles were retained for data abstraction. Findings indicate that the relationships between Mn in blood and both external Mn exposure indices and neurofunctional impairments are limited and inconsistent. Different sources of exposure to Mn compounds, heterogeneity in the methodological approaches, and inadequate reporting of essential information limited direct comparison of the reported findings. Among the Mn-exposure biomarkers considered in this review - including biomarkers in blood, plasma, serum, erythrocytes, urine, bone, toenails, fingernails, hair, saliva - biomarkers in whole blood may provide to be most useful in Mn biomonitoring and risk assessment.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in ToxicologySame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207