Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35999257›Full record

ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2023

Individual-level permethrin exposure biomarkers in U.S. army soldiers: comparison of two treatment formulations for military uniforms.

Susan P Proctor, V T Nguyen, Ashley A Hebert, Kathryn M Taylor, Holly L McClung, Kristin J Heaton, Maria Ospina, Antonia M Calafat

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Susan P ProctorMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA. spproctor@comcast.net.ORCID 0000-0002-0941-5160
V T NguyenMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA.
Ashley A HebertMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA.
Kathryn M TaylorMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA.
Holly L McClungMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA.
Kristin J HeatonMilitary Performance Division, United States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 10 General Greene Avenue, Natick, MA, USA.
Maria OspinaCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health, Division of Laboratory Sciences, 4770 Buford Hwy, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Antonia M CalafatCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health, Division of Laboratory Sciences, 4770 Buford Hwy, Atlanta, GA, USA.
U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence suggests that wearing permethrin-treated military uniforms is not associated with current adverse health conditions. However, exposure through this route results in permethrin biomarker concentrations considerably higher than those in the U.S. POPULATION: The U.S. Army is exploring different methods of uniform treatment that reduce exposure while maintaining effective protection from insect vector-borne diseases.

objectiveTo compare permethrin exposure when wearing two types of permethrin-treated military uniforms.

methodsEight male soldiers participated in a 32-day crossover design study to compare permethrin exposure when wearing the current Army uniform (CurrU) and a uniform with a new applied fabric treatment (NewU). Each soldier wore the uniforms for designated 8 h/day time periods over 3 consecutive days separated by a 'wash-out' week of no exposure. Permethrin exposure was assessed from the urinary concentrations of 3-phenoxybenzoic acid (3-PBA) and of the sum of cis- and trans-3-(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (∑DCCA). Estimated dose was determined based on ∑DCCA concentrations.

resultsPermethrin exposure biomarkers were 21% (3-PBA, p = 0.025) and 35% (∑DCCA, p < 0.001) lower when wearing the NewU compared to the CurrU; the dose was 33% lower (p = 0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: Findings suggest the new treatment reduces human permethrin exposure biomarkers resulting from wearing-treated military uniforms.

Indexed as

Military PersonnelPyrethrinsBenzoatesBiomarkersClothingCross-Over StudiesHumansMalePermethrin3-phenoxybenzoic acidBenzoatesBiomarkersPermethrinPyrethrinsAbsorbed doseMilitaryPermethrinPesticidesUniform treatmentUrinary biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID35999257
PMCPMC10140735
OpenAlexW4292714576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.