ArticlePloS one2022
Development of an observational exposure human biomonitoring study to assess Canadian children's DEET exposure during protective use.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Throughput Suspect Screening Reveals Widespread Pesticide Exposure in Early Childhood.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Correlation between environmental DEET exposure and the mortality rate of cancer survivors: a large-sample cross-sectional investigation.BMC cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomonitoring data of N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) in children is scarce and limited to controlled exposure and surveillance studies. We conducted a 24-hour observational exposure and human biomonitoring study designed to estimate use of and exposure to DEET-based insect repellents by Canadian children in an overnight summer camp setting. Here, we present our study design and methodology. In 2019, children between the ages of 7 and 13 took part in the study (n = 126). Children controlled their use of DEET-based insect repellents, and provided an account of their activities at camp that could impact insect repellent absorption. Children provided a total of 389 urine samples throughout the study day, and reported the time that they applied insect repellent, which allowed us to contextualize urinary DEET and metabolite concentrations with respect to the timing of insect repellent application. DEET (2.3% <Limits of detection (LOD)) and two metabolites, N,N-diethyl-m-(hydroxymethyl)benzamide (DHMB) (0% <LOD) and 3-diethylcarbamoyl benzoic acid (DCBA) (0% <LOD), were measured in urine samples. Three time difference scenarios were established for the data and analysed to account for these complex time-dependent data, which demonstrated the need for DEET biomonitoring to be done in context with the timing of a known DEET exposure or over the course of at least 14 to 24 hours to better capture the excretion curve. To our knowledge, this is the first field-based study of real-world exposure to DEET in children. Our experience and results suggest that this type of real-world observational exposure study with a human biomonitoring component can generate data reflective of actual exposure, but is not without significant logistic, practical, and analytical challenges.
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.