| Title |
Application of chemometric techniques in studies of toxicity of selected commercially available products for infants and children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10661-017-6007-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia Szczepańska, Błażej Kudłak, Miroslava Nedyalkova, Vasil Simeonov, Jacek Namieśnik |
| Abstract |
The goal of the present study is to assess the impact of the experimental conditions for extraction procedures (time of extraction, thermal treatment and type of extraction media) as applied to several baby and infant products checked for their possible ecotoxicological response when tested by various ecotoxicity tests (Microtox(®), Ostracodtoxkit F™ and Xenoscreen YES/YAS™). The systems under consideration are multidimensional by nature and, therefore, the appropriate assessment approach was intelligent data analysis (chemometrics). Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) and principal component analysis (PCA) were selected as reliable data mining methods for the interpretation of the ecotoxicity data. We show that the different experimental conditions have a significant impact on the ecotoxicity levels observed, especially those measured by Microtox(®) and Ostracodtoxkit F™ tests. The time of contact proves to be a very significant factor for all extraction media and ecotoxicity test procedures. The present study is a pioneering effort to offer a specific expert approach for analysing links between the type of test measurement methodology and imposed experimental conditions to mimic real-life circumstances in the use of baby and infant products. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Researcher | 4 | 20% |
| Professor | 3 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 7 | 35% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#19,382,126
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,865
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,101
of 320,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#33
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.