Organophosphorus flame retardants in children’s car seats: Implications for vehicle air quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flame retardants (FRs) are used in many consumer products for fire safety reasons. Their use in children’s car seats may result in children’s and vehicle occupants’ exposure to these compounds including inhalation exposure through poor vehicle air quality. We have tested several children’s car seats from local retailers for the presence of FRs. A number of organophosphorus flame retardants (OPFRs) were identified in the extracts (dichloromethane) of eight foam materials taken from the seats. They included several organophosphates (triethyl phosphate (TEP) (detected in all 8 samples) followed by tris(butoxyethyl) phosphate (2), triphenyl phosphate (1), di-(t-butylphenyl) phenyl phosphate (1) butyl diethyl phosphate (1) and tris(4-tert-butylphenyl) phosphate (1)) and organophosphonates (two isomers of 5-ethyl-2-methyl-2-oxido-1,3,2-dioxaphosphinan-5-yl)methyl methyl methylphosphonate (PMMMP) (detected in 5 of the 8 samples) followed by diethyl ethylphosphonate (1) and 4-methoxy-2-methylbutyl ethyl butylphosphonate (1)). TEP was the most frequently detected among these OPFRs. Due to its relatively high vapour pressure (0.39 mm Hg at 25 °C) among detected OPFRs, TEP is most likely to emit into vehicle interior air during product use, which could result in inhalation exposure for the children using the car seat and other passengers. We therefore have tested the emission rate of TEP in a micro-chamber at 40 °C for estimating potential exposure of vehicle occupants. The emission profile shows the concentrations of TEP in the chamber reached a maximum within the first few hours and then decreased over time. There was a lack of correlation between 24-hour average emission rate and concentrations of TEP in the product. The exact health risk to children and other vehicle occupants in this case requires further research to quantify.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".