Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25859901›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2015

Uses of NHANES Biomarker Data for Chemical Risk Assessment: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Jon R Sobus, Robert S DeWoskin, Yu-Mei Tan, Joachim D Pleil, Martin Blake Phillips, Barbara Jane George, Krista Christensen, Dina M Schreinemachers, Marc A Williams, Elaine A Cohen Hubal and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing 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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Bayesian inference of chemical exposures from NHANES urine biomonitoring data.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Jon R SobusNational Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Robert S DeWoskin
Yu-Mei Tan
Joachim D Pleil
Martin Blake Phillips
Barbara Jane George
Krista Christensen
Dina M Schreinemachers
Marc A Williams
Elaine A Cohen Hubal
Stephen W Edwards

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEach year, the U.S. NHANES measures hundreds of chemical biomarkers in samples from thousands of study participants. These biomarker measurements are used to establish population reference ranges, track exposure trends, identify population subsets with elevated exposures, and prioritize research needs. There is now interest in further utilizing the NHANES data to inform chemical risk assessments.

objectivesThis article highlights a) the extent to which U.S. NHANES chemical biomarker data have been evaluated, b) groups of chemicals that have been studied, c) data analysis approaches and challenges, and d) opportunities for using these data to inform risk assessments.

methodsA literature search (1999-2013) was performed to identify publications in which U.S. NHANES data were reported. Manual curation identified only the subset of publications that clearly utilized chemical biomarker data. This subset was evaluated for chemical groupings, data analysis approaches, and overall trends.

resultsA small percentage of the sampled NHANES-related publications reported on chemical biomarkers (8% yearly average). Of 11 chemical groups, metals/metalloids were most frequently evaluated (49%), followed by pesticides (9%) and environmental phenols (7%). Studies of multiple chemical groups were also common (8%). Publications linking chemical biomarkers to health metrics have increased dramatically in recent years. New studies are addressing challenges related to NHANES data interpretation in health risk contexts.

conclusionsThis article demonstrates growing use of NHANES chemical biomarker data in studies that can impact risk assessments. Best practices for analysis and interpretation must be defined and adopted to allow the full potential of NHANES to be realized.

Indexed as

Environmental ExposureNutrition SurveysBiomarkersEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsHumansRisk AssessmentUnited StatesBiomarkersEnvironmental Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID25859901
PMCPMC4590763

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.