ArticleJournal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology2014
Analytical considerations in the clinical laboratory assessment of metals.
Article in Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heavy Metal Toxicity in Clinical and Environmental Health: Sources, Mechanisms, Diagnostics, and Evidence-Based Management of Mercury, Lead, Cadmium, and Arsenic.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a biomonitoring method to measure As, Cr, and Ni in human urine samples by ICP-UCT-MS.International journal of hygiene and environmental health · 2021Article
- Predictors of urinary and blood Metal(loid) concentrations among pregnant women in Northern Puerto Rico.Environmental research · 2020Article
- Trace Metals Screening Process of Devices Used for the Collection, Analysis, and Storage of Biological Specimens.Atomic spectroscopy · 2018Article
- Heavy Metal Exposure and Metabolic Syndrome: Evidence from Human and Model System Studies.Current environmental health reports · 2018Review
- Private Well Water Safety: Practical Counseling Strategies for Primary Care.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The presence of metals in the environment is ubiquitous and humans are constantly being exposed to them. As such, a general concern exists about potential health consequences that result from the exposure to metals. The continued efforts of environmental scientists to measure metals in clinical specimens are important for defining the extent of human exposure to these chemicals. Laboratory methods to measure the concentration of metals in human blood or urine are available, and they can be used to assess the extent of human exposure to these chemicals. However, several considerations should be reviewed when requesting a laboratory measurement of metals because some factors can affect the test result or its interpretation. These considerations are discussed in this article and include pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical factors. Clinicians with this knowledge will be able to request these laboratory tests for their patients with enhanced confidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.