Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34347456›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2021

Chemical Characterization of Recycled Consumer Products Using Suspect Screening Analysis.

Charles N Lowe, Katherine A Phillips, Kristin A Favela, Alice Y Yau, John F Wambaugh, Jon R Sobus, Antony J Williams, Ashley J Pfirrman, Kristin K Isaacs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Generic formulations: availability and applicability for exposure assessment.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Exposure forecasting - ExpoCast - for data-poor chemicals in commerce and the environment.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2022
    Review
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

9 authors.

Charles N LoweOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9151-6157
Katherine A PhillipsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5703-0698
Kristin A FavelaSouthwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas 78759, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0702-8316
Alice Y YauSouthwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas 78759, United States.
John F WambaughCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4024-534X
Jon R SobusCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.
Antony J WilliamsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.
Ashley J PfirrmanCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.
Kristin K IsaacsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9547-1654

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recycled materials are found in many consumer products as part of a circular economy; however, the chemical content of recycled products is generally uncharacterized. A suspect screening analysis using two-dimensional gas chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC × GC-TOFMS) was applied to 210 products (154 recycled, 56 virgin) across seven categories. Chemicals in products were tentatively identified using a standard spectral library or confirmed using chemical standards. A total of 918 probable chemical structures identified (112 of which were confirmed) in recycled materials versus 587 (110 confirmed) in virgin materials. Identified chemicals were characterized in terms of their functional use and structural class. Recycled paper products and construction materials contained greater numbers of chemicals than virgin products; 733 identified chemicals had greater occurrence in recycled compared to virgin materials. Products made from recycled materials contained greater numbers of fragrances, flame retardants, solvents, biocides, and dyes. The results were clustered to identify groups of chemicals potentially associated with unique chemical sources, and identified chemicals were prioritized for further study using high-throughput hazard and exposure information. While occurrence is not necessarily indicative of risk, these results can be used to inform the expansion of existing models or identify exposure pathways currently neglected in exposure assessments.

Indexed as

Flame RetardantsConstruction MaterialsGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryRecyclingFlame Retardantsconsumer exposureconsumer productsExpoCasthuman exposure modelingnontargeted analysisrecyclingsuspect screening

Identifiers

PMID34347456
PMCPMC8475772

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.