Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30407086›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2018

A State-of-the-Science Review of Mercury Biomarkers in Human Populations Worldwide between 2000 and 2018.

Niladri Basu, Milena Horvat, David C Evers, Irina Zastenskaya, Pál Weihe, Joanna Tempowski

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 211 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Chelation treatment in a novel sub-toxic multi-metal model in rats.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Which prenatal biomarker is most appropriate for methylmercury dose-response for neurodevelopmental effects?Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Niladri BasuFaculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Milena HorvatDepartment of Environmental Sciences, Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
David C EversBiodiversity Research Institute, Portland, Maine, USA.
Irina ZastenskayaEuropean Centre for Environment and Health, World Health Organization, Bonn, Germany.
Pál WeiheDepartment of Occupational Medicine and Public Health, Faroese Hospital System, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands, Denmark.
Joanna TempowskiDepartment of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Biodiversity Research Institute · USJožef Stefan Institute · SIMcGill University · CAUniversity of the Faroe Islands · FOWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

1/2-The West Africa-Michigan CHARTER II for GEOHealth-USAU2RTW010110 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FOBIL, JULIUS N., ROBINS, THOMAS G · 2015 to 2019
$1.3M
FIC NIH HHS U2R TW010110World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Minamata Convention on Mercury provided a mandate for action against global mercury pollution. However, our knowledge of mercury exposures is limited because there are many regions and subpopulations with little or no data.

objectiveWe aimed to increase worldwide understanding of human exposures to mercury by collecting, collating, and analyzing mercury concentrations in biomarker samples reported in the published scientific literature.

methodA systematic search of the peer-reviewed scientific literature was performed using three databases. A priori search strategy, eligibility criteria, and data extraction steps were used to identify relevant studies.

resultsWe collected 424,858 mercury biomarker measurements from 335,991 individuals represented in 312 articles from 75 countries. General background populations with insignificant exposures have blood, hair, and urine mercury levels that generally fall under [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text], respectively. We identified four populations of concern:

conclusionsThis review suggests that all populations worldwide are exposed to some amount of mercury and that there is great variability in exposures within and across countries and regions. There remain many geographic regions and subpopulations with limited data, thus hindering evidence-based decision making. This type of information is critical in helping understand exposures, particularly in light of certain stipulations in the Minamata Convention on Mercury. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP3904.

Indexed as

AnimalsArctic RegionsBiomarkersEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutionFood ContaminationHairHumansMercuryMiningSeafoodBiomarkersMercury

Identifiers

PMID30407086
PMCPMC6371716
OpenAlexW2895289923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.