Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39048064›Full record

SynthesisEnvironmental research2024

Meta-analysis of soil and dust ingestion studies.

Jonathan Cohen, Heidi Hubbard, Halûk Özkaynak, Kent Thomas, Linda Phillips, Nicolle Tulve

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Environmental research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. A transdisciplinary process-oriented approach to evaluate infant exposure to indoor dust.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Jonathan CohenICF, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: jpcohen.uk@gmail.com.
Heidi HubbardICF, Durham, NC, USA.
Halûk ÖzkaynakLaguna Woods, CA, USA.
Kent ThomasU.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Linda PhillipsU.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Nicolle TulveU.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. Electronic address: tulve.nicolle@epa.gov.

Funding

EPA 68HERC19D0003Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ingestion of soil and dust by children and adults is a potential source of exposure to environmental contaminants. To advance beyond the simple averaging of estimates used in the U.S. EPA's Exposure Factors Handbook (EFH), we describe a novel meta-analysis of all available studies that provided soil or dust ingestion estimates for children or adults conducted in the United States and Canada. Using meta-analytic techniques, we estimate the mean total soil plus dust ingestion rates and confidence intervals (CIs) for eleven age groups (0 - <1 month (m), 1 - <3 m, 3 - <6 m, 6 - <12 m, 1 - <2 years (y), 2 - <3 y, 3 - <6 y, 6 - <11 y, 11 - <16 y, 16 - <21 y, and 21+ y). These age groups were selected for consistency with the EFH update to Chapter 5 and the U.S. EPA's Age Grouping Guidance. For each age group, we calculated best estimates for the three main types of ingestion studies: tracer studies based on the aluminum tracer, biokinetic studies, and activity pattern (modeling) studies, as well as overall estimates for all three study types combined. Our meta-analysis combined study estimates using the alternative statistical approaches of the fixed effect method (inverse variance method, "I-V") and two random effects methods, DerSimonian and Laird's method of moments ("DSL") and the restricted maximum likelihood method ("MIXED"). For each approach, the mean total soil plus dust ingestion rate estimates for each study type generally aligned well with the EFH, ranging from 36 to 68 mg/day for infants, 56-72 mg/day for young children, and 12-32 mg/day for adolescents and adults. When all three study types were combined, the upper bounds of the 95% CI were generally the lowest for the I-V method and the highest for the MIXED method. The estimates produced here can be used for stochastic risk assessments and provide a better estimate of soil and dust ingestion rates across age groups.

Indexed as

DustSoilAdolescentCanadaChildChild, PreschoolEatingEnvironmental ExposureHumansInfantInfant, NewbornSoil PollutantsUnited StatesYoung AdultDustSoilSoil PollutantsChildrenDustIngestionSoilTrace elements

Identifiers

PMID39048064
PMCPMC12694522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.