Descriptive analysis of organophosphate ester metabolites in a pan-Canadian pregnancy cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organophosphate esters (OPEs) are widely used in numerous consumer products for their flame retardant and plasticizing properties. Despite potential widespread exposure, biomonitoring data during critical windows of development are scarce and limited to the most widely studied metabolites. We quantified urinary concentrations of multiple OPE metabolites in a vulnerable Canadian population. Using data and biobanked specimens from the Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study (2008-2011), we measured first trimester urinary concentrations of 15 OPE metabolites as well as one flame retardant metabolite and quantified associations with sociodemographic and sample collection characteristics in 1865 pregnant participants. We applied 2 different analytical methods to quantify OPEs, one using UItra-Performance Liquid Chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) and the other using Atmospheric Pressure Gas Chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (APGC-MS/MS) with sensitive limits of detection (0.008-0.1 μg/L). We modelled associations between sociodemographic and sample collection characteristics and specific gravity-standardized chemical concentrations. Six OPE metabolites were detected in the majority (68.1-97.4 %) of participants. Bis-(2-chloroethyl) hydrogen phosphate had the highest detection rate (97.4 %). Diphenyl phosphate had the highest geometric mean concentration (0.657 μg/L). Metabolites of tricresyl phosphate were detected in few participants. Associations between sociodemographic characteristics varied according to each OPE metabolite. Pre-pregnancy body mass index tended to be positively associated with OPE metabolite concentrations whereas age tended to be inversely associated with OPE concentrations. OPE concentrations were, on average, higher in urine samples collected in the summer than other seasons the winter. We present the largest biomonitoring study of OPE metabolites in pregnant people to date. These findings demonstrate widespread exposure to OPEs and their metabolites and identify subpopulations who may experience heightened exposure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".