Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38787116›Full record

ArticleToxics2024

Biological Monitoring of Glyphosate Exposure among Knapsack Sprayers in Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Sunisa Chaiklieng, Kodchakorn Uengchuen, Netsirin Gissawong, Supalax Srijaranai, Herman Autrup

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

5 authors.

Sunisa ChaikliengDepartment of Occupational Safety and Environmental Health, Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4190-4930
Kodchakorn UengchuenProgram in M.Sc. Occupational Health and Safety, Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Netsirin GissawongMaterials Chemistry Research Center, Department of Chemistry and Center of Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Supalax SrijaranaiMaterials Chemistry Research Center, Department of Chemistry and Center of Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Herman AutrupInstitute of Public Health, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sprayers' exposure to glyphosate was analyzed through detection of its biomarker in spot urine biological monitoring, and the health risk was assessed using the biomatrix model. Urine samples were collected from 15 sprayers after spraying, and the glyphosate concentration was determined by using the DLLME-HPLC method with a UV detector. The calibration curve for glyphosate was linear in the range of 0.4-100 µg/L, while the limits of detection and quantification were 0.1 µg/L and 0.4 µg/L, respectively. The human health risk was estimated using the hazard quotient (HQ) and the biomatrix of risk assessment. The internal dose ranged from 0.0001 to 0.0021 mg/kg b.w./day. The non-cancer HQ showed no potential health risk concerns (HQ < 1). The biomatrix of health risk assessment, based on urinary glyphosate concentration, exhibited a strong correlation with the health risk matrix model. This correlation was determined by considering the likelihood of exposure, calculated from the quantity of glyphosate used and the usage of personal protective equipment (r = 0.854,

Indexed as

biomatrixoccupational exposurerisk assessmenturinary glyphosate

Identifiers

PMID38787116
PMCPMC11125926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.