Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20308034›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2010

Exposure science: a view of the past and milestones for the future.

Paul J Lioy

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. What Is New about the Exposome? Exploring Scientific Change in Contemporary Epidemiology.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Blood-borne biomarkers and bioindicators for linking exposure to health effects in environmental health science.Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The public health exposome: a population-based, exposure science approach to health disparities research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Paul J LioyEnvironmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA. plioy@eohsi.rutgers.edu

Funding

Translational Research Support CoreP30ES005022 · NIEHS · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI ROBERT John LAUMBACH · 1988 to 2026
$47.4M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES005022NIEHS NIH HHS P30ES005022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study of human exposure to environmental toxicants has evolved as a scientific field over the past 30 years.

objectivesThis review provides a historical perspective on the growth of exposure science as a field, with some emphasis on the results from initial observational studies in obtaining information needed for generating hypotheses on significant human contact with environmental agents, testing the performance of models, and reducing exposures to protect public health. DISCUSSION: Advances in activity pattern and behavioral research that established a suite of variables needed to accurately define contact and factors that influence contact are also discussed. The identification and characterization of these factors have played a pivotal role in the growth of the field and in developing exposure reduction strategies. Answers to two key questions on the relevance and fundamental value of exposure science to the fields of environmental health and risk management are presented as a path forward: a) What does one do with such exposure information? b) What roles does exposure science play in situations beyond observational analyses and interpretation?

conclusionsThe discussion identifies the need for more focused use of observational studies of exposure for epidemiologic analyses. Further, the introduction and use of new tools and approaches for hypothesis testing that can improve the use of exposure science in prevention research for risk management is needed to affect the source-to-effect continuum. A major restructuring of the field is not required to achieve innovation. However, additional resources for training and education are required to ensure that the potential for exposure science to play a central role in reducing and preventing excess risk within environmental/occupational health is achieved.

Indexed as

EcologyEnvironmental ExposureHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansResearchRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID20308034
PMCPMC2920079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.