ReviewToxics2025
Non-Invasive Matrices for the Human Biomonitoring of PFAS: An Updated Review of the Scientific Literature.
Review in Toxics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Exposure and Ischemic Heart Disease: Emerging Evidence from the Literature.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Urine-to-Blood Partitioning of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Human Biomonitoring: Implications for Environmental Exposure Analysis and Bioaccumulation Assessment.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Performance of a Sequencing Biofilter Coupled with a Dual-Media Granular Activated Carbon Filter for PFAS Mitigation in Landfill Leachate.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mixture Toxicity in Human Health: Integrating One Health, Exposomics, and Modern Risk Assessment Strategies.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Review
- Article
- The differences in levels of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in the hair of wild terrestrial mammals with various feeding behaviour.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are synthetic chemicals widely used in consumer and industrial products due to their unique physicochemical properties. However, their persistence and bioaccumulative potential pose significant environmental and human health risks. This review focuses on the use of non-invasive matrices-urine, hair, and nails-for the human biomonitoring of PFAS, highlighting key findings from scientific studies. While urine offers a non-invasive and practical option, its limited sensitivity for long-chain PFAS requires further analytical advances. Hair and nails have demonstrated potential for use in biomonitoring, with higher detection frequencies and concentrations for certain PFAS compared to urine. The variability in PFAS levels across studies reflects differences in population characteristics, exposure sources, and geographic regions. This review emphasizes the need for standardized analytical methods, expanded population studies, and the use of complementary matrices to enhance the accuracy and reliability of PFAS exposure assessment.
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.