#5395 ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PARABEN EXPOSURE AND EARLY RENAL INJURY IN A MIDDLE-AGED ADULT IN TAIWAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Aims Parabens are a class of preservatives used in the cosmetics industry and are widely used in people's daily lives, including personal care products (PCPs), pharmaceuticals and food. Epidemiological studies concerning the relations of exposure to parabens with renal function were limited. We aimed to investigate the potential sources of paraben exposure, estimate the daily intake (DI) of four parabens based on their urinary levels and the association between urinary paraben and renal function in a middle-aged adult population in Taiwan. Method We recruited 591 subjects aged from ≥40 to <65 years old (yrs) who have participated in Taiwan Environmental Survey for Toxicants (TEST) study from 2013-2016. Urinary parabens including methylparaben (MeP), ethylparaben (EtP), propylparaben (PrP), and butylparaben (BuP) are measured by liquid chromatography/ tandem mass spectrometry. The cross-sectional analysis of the association between urinary paraben and biomarkers of renal function have also been established. Results The urinary MeP, EtP, PrP and BuP (median) levels were measured at 442, 42.9, 107 and 5.92 μg/L, respectively, which were also 10 times higher than those in other countries. Subjects aged from ≥55 to <65 yrs had higher urinary MeP and EtP levels and DI than those aged from ≥40 to <55 yrs (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2). The median of DI was higher in lotion, perfume and nail polish users than those seldom used (Fig. 3). However, there was no significant difference between DI and PCPs usage, or the cumulative usage of PCPs by gender. The median of creatinine, microalbumin, urinary protein and uric acid were significantly higher in men than in women, the albumin to creatinine ratio was significantly higher in women (3.73 mg/g) than in men (3.05 mg/g). Conclusion The urinary paraben concentration of middle-aged adults in Taiwan was significantly higher than those in US, Canada, and Korea. There was no significant difference among paraben levels, age and gender. PCPs usage was a source of paraben 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".