↓ Skip to main content

Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and wildlife.

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health Perspectives, December 1998
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
21 policy sources
twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2706 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
607 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and wildlife.
Published in
Environmental Health Perspectives, December 1998
DOI 10.1289/ehp.98106775
Pubmed ID
Authors

M Van den Berg, L Birnbaum, A T Bosveld, B Brunström, P Cook, M Feeley, J P Giesy, A Hanberg, R Hasegawa, S W Kennedy, T Kubiak, J C Larsen, F X van Leeuwen, A K Liem, C Nolt, R E Peterson, L Poellinger, S Safe, D Schrenk, D Tillitt, M Tysklind, M Younes, F Waern, T Zacharewski

Abstract

An expert meeting was organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and held in Stockholm on 15-18 June 1997. The objective of this meeting was to derive consensus toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and dibenzofurans (PCDFs) and dioxinlike polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) for both human, fish, and wildlife risk assessment. Based on existing literature data, TEFs were (re)evaluated and either revised (mammals) or established (fish and birds). A few mammalian WHO-TEFs were revised, including 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated DD, octachlorinated DD, octachlorinated DF, and PCB 77. These mammalian TEFs are also considered applicable for humans and wild mammalian species. Furthermore, it was concluded that there was insufficient in vivo evidence to continue the use of TEFs for some di-ortho PCBs, as suggested earlier by Ahlborg et al. [Chemosphere 28:1049-1067 (1994)]. In addition, TEFs for fish and birds were determined. The WHO working group attempted to harmonize TEFs across different taxa to the extent possible. However, total synchronization of TEFs was not feasible, as there were orders of a magnitude difference in TEFs between taxa for some compounds. In this respect, the absent or very low response of fish to mono-ortho PCBs is most noticeable compared to mammals and birds. Uncertainties that could compromise the TEF concept were also reviewed, including nonadditive interactions, differences in shape of the dose-response curve, and species responsiveness. In spite of these uncertainties, it was concluded that the TEF concept is still the most plausible and feasible approach for risk assessment of halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons with dioxinlike properties.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 607 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 1%
Canada 6 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 578 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 121 20%
Researcher 105 17%
Student > Master 89 15%
Student > Bachelor 52 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 38 6%
Other 98 16%
Unknown 104 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 154 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 124 20%
Chemistry 60 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 4%
Engineering 25 4%
Other 81 13%
Unknown 136 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 07 January 2024.
All research outputs
#589,816
of 26,561,164 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health Perspectives
#588
of 9,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#416
of 111,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health Perspectives
#1
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,561,164 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 111,420 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.