ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
An Exploration of Machine Learning Methods in Human Biomonitoring.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is being broadly integrated into processes to manage and analyze large amounts of data accurately and efficiently. In this work, we explored how AI methods, in particular machine learning (ML), are being implemented in human biomonitoring using a mixed methodology approach that consisted of: (1) a scoping literature review and (2) an international scan of biomonitoring programs to contextualize current practices and perceptions from researchers in the field. We synthesized findings from the review according to the year of publication, biomonitoring study and location, study outcomes, and the most frequent ML methods. We additionally categorized all published ML methods from the review according to three dimensions (paradigm, type of task, and model structure), mapped studies to biomonitoring themes and other applications, and provided details for the more commonly applied ML methods. The international scan was administered through a 30-question online survey and gathered information on current uses, perspectives, and barriers related to AI. Scoping review: We found 286 studies that applied a ML method to human biomonitoring data. Eighty-two ML methods were identified, with the most common being supervised approaches. ML was predominantly applied to predict health-related outcomes based on chemical exposure. International scan: The survey yielded 30 responses from programs across 15 countries. Approximately 27% of respondents reported implementing AI-related methods in the collection and analysis of biomonitoring data, and the primary barrier to adopting these methods was a lack of technical expertise (80%). This exploratory work provides an integrated understanding of ML applications in the human biomonitoring field. ML clearly holds promise for furthering our understanding of chemical exposure in people and will likely undergo continued growth in applications.
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.