ArticleEnvironment international2022
A mass-balance approach to evaluate arsenic intake and excretion in different populations.
Article in Environment international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of maternal arsenic exposure on birth outcomes using harmonized data across three birth cohorts.Toxicology and environmental health sciences · 2026Article
- Public Water Arsenic and Birth Outcomes in the Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Cohort.JAMA network open · 2025Observational
- Zinc as a Mechanism-Based Strategy for Mitigation of Metals Toxicity.Current environmental health reports · 2025Review
- Invited Perspective: The Importance of Community Involvement in Interventions to Reduce Arsenic Exposure and Improve Health Outcomes in Indigenous Communities.Environmental health perspectives · 2024Article
- Adapting to Climate Change: Leveraging Systems-Focused Multidisciplinary Research to Promote Resilience.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Unless a toxicant builds up in a deep compartment, intake by the human body must on average balance the amount that is lost. We apply this idea to assess arsenic (As) exposure misclassification in three previously studied populations in rural Bangladesh (n = 11,224), Navajo Nation in the Southwestern United States (n = 619), and northern Chile (n = 630), under varying assumptions about As sources. Relationships between As intake and excretion were simulated by taking into account additional sources, as well as variability in urine dilution inferred from urinary creatinine. The simulations bring As intake closer to As excretion but also indicate that some exposure misclassification remains. In rural Bangladesh, accounting for intake from more than one well and rice improved the alignment of intake and excretion, especially at low exposure. In Navajo Nation, comparing intake and excretion revealed home dust as an important source. Finally, in northern Chile, while food-frequency questionnaires and urinary As speciation indicate fish and shellfish sources, persistent imbalance of intake and excretion suggests imprecise measures of drinking water arsenic as a major cause of exposure misclassification. The mass-balance approach could prove to be useful for evaluating sources of exposure to toxicants in other settings.
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.