MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414830261 · doi:10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.07.039

Assessment of arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances concentrations in human milk and infant formula in the United States: a systematic review

2025· article· en· W4414830261 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel C Thoerig, Lauren E O’Connor, Arin A. Balalian, Rupal Trivedi, Shailesh Advani, Cassi N Uffelman, Trish Bosse, Margaret Foster, Kathryn G. Dewey, Mandy Fisher, Aubrey L. Galusha, Carin Huset, Amanda J MacFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nutrition SocietyHealth Canada
FundersU.S. Food and Drug Administration
KeywordsInfant formulaPublic healthInfant feedingMercury (programming language)Risk assessmentHuman health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Foods, including human milk (HM) and infant formula (IF), can be sources of environmental contaminant exposure for infants, which can impact health and development. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review describes arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) concentrations in HM and IF in the United States (PROSPERO #CRD42024528756). METHODS: We searched CAB Abstracts, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, and MEDLINE for peer-reviewed articles published in English through 2 April, 2025 (no date restrictions). Studies that assessed contaminant concentrations in HM or IF from countries rated as "high" or "very high" on the Human Development Index were eligible. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. We narratively synthesized United States studies and assessed the certainty of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). We developed heat maps for studies from all countries that may help inform evidence gaps in future systematic reviews. RESULTS: From the United States, 14 HM and 16 IF studies were included. For HM, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) concentrations ranged from undetected to 36.1 pg/mL, and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) ranged from undetected to 106 pg/mL (GRADE: moderate); evidence was lacking for perfluorononanoic acid and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid. For IF, all PFAS were largely undetected (GRADE: moderate). For HM and IF, studies for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury had small and unrepresentative samples, and most were published before 2000. We identified 317 and 108 articles for HM and IF, respectively, from other countries. CONCLUSIONS: In published, peer-reviewed United States studies, PFOA and PFOS were detected in HM; PFAS were largely undetected in IF. There was a paucity of contemporary evidence for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury in HM or IF in the United States, but we identified evidence from other countries that could help inform these knowledge gaps. Public health agencies recommend feeding infants HM given the benefits outweigh potential risks of contaminant exposure. This trial was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42024528756 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024528756).

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.011
Bibliometrics0.0170.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical NutritionSame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207