ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2026
A Bayesian approach to aggregated chemical exposure assessment.
Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman exposure to a chemical commonly arises from multiple sources, yet traditional assessments often treat these sources in isolation, overlooking their aggregated impact.
objectiveIntroducing a novel approach to aggregated chemical exposure assessment that explicitly accounts for these intertwined exposure pathways.
methodsA conceptual framework was developed that describes this approach in multiple steps, namely: 1) the comprehensive integration of diverse datasets, such as consumption surveys, demographics, chemical measurements, and market presence data; 2) the modeling of singular exposure to distinct sources using Bayesian inference; 3) the estimation of aggregated exposure through a simulation-based strategy reflecting the full spectrum of individual exposure scenarios. The value of this approach is demonstrated using the case of titanium dioxide, a chemical found in foods, dietary supplements, medicines, and personal care products that has been banned as a food additive in the European Union since 2022. A comparison was hereby made between exposure before and after the ban, as well as between sources.
resultsThrough this case study, common data challenges in the context of aggregated exposure assessment, including missing values, limited sample sizes, uncertainties, and inconsistencies, were effectively showcased and addressed by leveraging the advantages of Bayesian inference. As such, robust estimates of aggregated exposure were derived between and across sources and populations, while incorporating relevant prior knowledge. SIGNIFICANCE: By capturing the complexity of real-world exposures, this comprehensive Bayesian approach provides decision-makers with more reliable probabilistic estimates to inform public health policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42014481What 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.