MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403525875 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.117190

Antioxidant vitamins’ modification of the adverse health effects induced by phthalate exposure: A scoping review of epidemiological and experimental studies

2024· review· en· W4403525875 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hua-Yan Mo, Chun-Han Shan, Xin Chen, Han Chen, De Wu, Fangbiao Tao, Hui Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueEcotoxicology and Environmental Safety · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAnhui Medical UniversityMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsAntioxidantPhthalateEpidemiologyAdverse effectEnvironmental healthMedicineToxicologyChemistryBiologyPharmacologyBiochemistryInternal medicineOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exposure to and health hazards of phthalates have received abundant attention. However, reducing phthalate exposure and further decreasing the associated health risks are difficult. Nonetheless, it is important to actively seek relevant measures. Recently, antioxidant vitamins have been frequently mentioned to improve phthalate-related issues. This scoping review summarizes the existing epidemiological and experimental studies on the interaction of phthalates with antioxidant vitamins. Through a systematic search, sparse epidemiological studies explored the effects of interaction between phthalates and vitamins on reproduction, the endocrine, respiratory, and nervous system and human aging. Four prospective studies were conducted in China, the United States, Canada and Netherlands. Only one study from Netherlands focused on the female reproductive system.The other three studies focused on neurological damage to fetuses caused by phthalate exposure, and its mitigation by vitamin supplementation during pregnancy. Four cross-sectional studies were conducted based on the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database. These studies involved hazards in different systems and interactions with different vitamins. Overall, epidemiological evidence suggests that antioxidant vitamins such as vitamin A, B, D, and folic acid probably may alter the health hazards induced by phthalate exposure. Current animal studies often focus on three phthalates, DBP, DEHP and DIDP, 2 2 DBP, dibutyl phthalate; DEHP, diethylhexyl phthalate; DIDP, diisodecyl phthalate and most commonly, the first two phthalates. These chemicals cause reproductive, urinary, digestive and neurodevelopmental damage; the antioxidant vitamin C, E and B could mitigate the harm caused by phthalates. Possible mechanisms involve reducing oxidative stress, removing methylation,etc. Determining whether these mechanisms are similar to those in humans requires a rigorous experimental study. • The first review explored vitamins' modification on phthalate-induced health effects. • Antioxidant vitamins mitigate PAEs-induced reproductive toxicity and neurotoxicity. • More research is on modulating effects of vitamin C and E on PAEs hazards.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetySame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207