Editorial: Endocrine disrupting chemicals in reproductive health, fertility, and early development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endocrine disrupting chemicals in reproductive health, fertility, and early developmentThe rising incidence of reproductive disorders in both men and women over the past few decades presents a significant global challenge, impacting societies and individuals worldwide.Environmental chemical exposure, including endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), is recognized as a contributing factor to this increasing disease burden (1).EDCs are known to disrupt sexual development by interfering with androgen, estrogen, and steroidogenesis pathways (2).However, there are still numerous unanswered questions regarding how these disruptions qualitatively and quantitatively lead to various diseases.Additionally, our understanding of EDCs' impacts through alternative mechanisms and signaling pathways is limited.Gaining this knowledge is crucial for ensuring human health, especially as regulatory toxicology increasingly moves away from animal testing towards alternative test methods for hazard identification and risk assessment.This Research Topic was launched to advance our understanding of how EDCs disrupt reproductive development and contribute to disease.Despite extensive research over the past three decades, many fundamental mechanisms of EDC effects in complex organisms, including humans, remain elusive.As regulatory toxicology shifts towards greater reliance on non-animal testing, it is essential to develop a clear mechanistic understanding to inform the creation of robust alternative testing strategies capable of identifying harmful chemicals for regulatory purposes or further in vivo testing.The first paper in this Research Topic, by Motawee et al., explores the potential ameliorating effects of ginger on cadmium-induced testicular toxicity in adult rats.Cadmium is a naturally occurring metal found in the Earth's crust and used in various industrial applications, including battery production, pigments, coatings, plastics, and cigarettes (3).It is toxic to humans and animals and can affect many organ systems such as kidneys, bones and the reproductive system when exposure occurs through ingestion, Frontiers in Endocrinology frontiersin.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.018 |
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".