<i>In utero</i> exposure to ionizing radiation and metabolic regulation: perspectives for future multi- and trans-generation effects studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The radiation protection community has been particularly attentive to the risks of delayed effects on offspring from low dose or low dose-rate exposures to ionizing radiation. Despite this, the current epidemiologic studies and scientific data are still insufficient to provide the necessary evidence for improving risk assessment guidelines. This literature review aims to inform future studies on multigenerational and transgenerational effects. It primarily focuses on animal studies involving in utero exposure and discusses crucial elements for interpreting the results. These elements include in utero exposure scenarios relative to the developmental stages of the embryo/fetus, and the primary biological mechanisms responsible for transmitting heritable or hereditary effects to future generations. The review addresses several issues within the contexts of both multigenerational and transgenerational effects, with a focus on hereditary perspectives.Conclusions Knowledge consolidation in the field of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) has led us to propose a new study strategy. This strategy aims to address the transgenerational effects of in utero exposure to low dose and low dose-rate radiation. Within this concept, there is a possibility that disruption of epigenetic programming in embryonic and fetal cells may occur. This disruption could lead to metabolic dysfunction, which in turn may cause abnormal responses to future environmental challenges, consequently increasing disease risk. Lastly, we discuss methodological limitations in our studies. These limitations are related to cohort size, follow-up time, model radiosensitivity, and analytical techniques. We propose scientific and analytical strategies for future research in this field.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".