MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410868762 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2025.106793

Contaminant Composition of Human Milk in the US: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4410868762 on OpenAlexaff
Arin A. Balalian, Rachel C Thoerig, Lauren E O’Connor, Rupal Trivedi, Shailesh K Advani, Trish K Bosse, Margaret Foster, Kathryn G. Dewey, Mandy Fisher, Aubrey L. Galusha, Carin A Husset, Jessica L. Reiner, Amanda J MacFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Cancer InstituteBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsComposition (language)Food scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives:The US Food and Drug Administration aims to reduce contaminant exposure from foods, especially for infants and children.Dietary exposure to contaminants during pregnancy and lactation may impact contaminant levels in human milk (HM), potentially impacting fetal and child development.Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to describe arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) concentrations in HM in the US and document available evidence from other countries.Methods: The protocol was informed by a technical expert panel.The search strategy was developed by two evidence synthesis information specialists.CAB Abstracts, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, and MEDLINE were searched for peerreviewed articles in English through October 18, 2024.Studies describing arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and PFAS concentrations in HM from countries rated 'high' or 'very high' on the Human Development Index (HDI) were included.Articles were independently screened at title/abstract and full text level by two reviewers.Data were synthesized narratively from US studies; data from other included countries were documented in evidence maps.Sample collection and analytic methods were reviewed by technical experts.ROBINS-E and GRADE were used to assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence, respectively.Results: From 8967 records identified, 322 articles described contaminants in HM, including 14 studies (3 prospective cohorts, 11 cross-sectional) with 870 participants from the US (arsenic n2, cadmium n2, lead n8, mercury n2, PFAS n4).Studies had some concerns or high risk of bias, largely due to selection bias and missing data.With moderate certainty, PFOA concentration in HM ranged from undetected to 36.1 pg/mL and PFOS ranged from undetected to 106 pg/mL in the US.The evidence for heavy metals, PFNA, or PFHxS in HM in the US was inconclusive due to small and unrepresentative samples, concerns about analytic methods, and outdated data.Conclusions: PFOA and PFOS were detected in HM in the US, but evidence about heavy metals was inconclusive.Future systematic reviews of evidence identified from other high to very high HDI countries could help address knowledge gaps and reduce contaminant exposure for pregnant and lactating individuals.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207