ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2024
A Snapshot of Lead in Consumer Products Across Four US Jurisdictions.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2024. 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.
- Lead and other Trace Elements in Spices in the Las Vegas Market: Human Health Risk Assessment.Biological trace element research · 2026Article
- Associations between self-reported personal care products use and menstrual cycle length and regularity in a US digital cohort.Environment international · 2026Article
- Heavy metal - habitual licking of a lead tape as rare cause of chronic lead poisoning: a case report.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Principles of environmental medicine: an educational case study of lead poisoning in Beethoven.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Invited Perspective: Why Aren't We Doing More to Ensure Consumer Products Are Free of Lead?Environmental health perspectives · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFollowing the removal of lead from gasoline, paint and pipes were thought to be the main sources of lead exposure in the United States. However, consumer products, such as certain spices, ceramic and metal cookware, traditional health remedies, and cultural powders, are increasingly recognized as important sources of lead exposure across the United States.
objectiveThis paper reviews data from four US jurisdictions that conduct in-home investigations for children with elevated blood lead levels (BLLs) to examine the prevalence of lead exposures associated with consumer products, in comparison with housing-related sources.
methodsAuthors reviewed investigation data (2010-2021) provided by California, Oregon, New York City, and King County, Washington, and compared the extent of lead exposures associated with housing-related vs. consumer products-related sources. DISCUSSION: The proportion of investigations identifying consumer products-related sources of lead exposure varied by jurisdiction (range: 15%-38%). A review of US CDC and US FDA alerts and New York City data indicates that these types of lead-containing products are often sourced internationally, with many hand carried into the United States during travel. Based on surveillance data, we believe that US immigrant and refugee communities are at an increased risk for lead exposures associated with these products. To engage health authorities, there is a need for evidentiary data. We recommend implementing a national product surveillance database systematically tracking data on consumer products tested by childhood lead poisoning prevention programs
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.