ArticlePloS one2016
Exposure Estimation for Risk Assessment of the Phthalate Incident in Taiwan.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- SLC6A14 Drives Mitochondrial Fusion and Oxidative Phosphorylation to Promote Cancer Stemness and Early-Onset of Breast Cancer.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Secular Increasing Trends in Female Thyroid Cancer Incidence in Taiwan.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Analysis of Pollution of Phthalates in Pork and Chicken in Taiwan Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry and Assessment of Health Risk.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn May 2011, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalates (DEHP) and, to a lesser extent, di-iso-nonyl phthalate (DiNP) were found to have been illegally used for many years in Taiwan as clouding agents in foods including sports drinks, juice beverages, tea drinks, fruit jam/nectar/jelly, and health or nutrient supplements.
objectiveTo estimate the DEHP exposure for the study participants for the follow-up epidemiological study and health risk assessment.
methodsA total of 347 individuals possibly highly exposed to phthalate-tainted foods participated in the study. Exposure assessment was performed based on the participants' responses to a structured questionnaire, self-report of exposure history, urinary metabolite concentrations, and DEHP concentration information in 2449 food records. A Bayesian statistical approach using Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation was employed to deal with the uncertainties in the DEHP concentrations of the contaminated foods and the participants' likelihood of being exposed.
resultsAn estimated 37% and 15% of children younger than 12 years old were exposed to DEHP at medium (20-50 μg / kg_bw / day) and high AvDIs (50-100 μg / kg_bw / day), respectively, prior to the episode (9% and 3% in adults, respectively). Moreover, 11% of children and 1% of adults were highly exposed (> 100 μg / kg_bw / day), with a maximum of 414.1 μg / kg_bw / day and 126.4 μg / kg_bw / day, respectively.
conclusionsThe phthalate exposure-associated adverse health effects for these participants warrant further investigation. The estimation procedure may be applied to other exposure assessment with various sources of uncertainties.
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.