Cited by 130Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsContact Dermatitis and AllergiesPesticide Exposure and Toxicity

Usage pattern of personal care products in California households

Wu, Xiangmei (May), Bennett, Deborah H., Ritz, Beate, Cassady, Diana L., Lee, Kiyoung, Hertz-Picciotto, Irva·2010·Food and Chemical Toxicology

Abstract

Given the concern over the potential for health risks associated with certain ingredients (e.g., phthalates) in personal care products, usage patterns of ∼30 types of personal care products (e.g., shampoo, sunscreen, fragrance, etc.) were collected in 604 California households through a telephone interview. Preferences in selecting products, e.g., scented or unscented, aerosol, and brand loyalty, were also investigated. Participants were recruited in three age groups, children (mostly preschoolers), their parents, and adults age 55 or older. Use frequencies of various product types varied by sex, age group, race, education, and climatic region. Product use by parent and child from the same household were correlated. Use frequencies of products in the same class (e.g., skincare) were moderately correlated, which may impact aggregate exposures. Use frequencies observed in this study were generally in the same range as those reported in the EPA Exposure Factor Handbook, but we found differences for some individual products. Our study provides additional data on population-based usage patterns of a large collection of commonly used personal care products pertaining to several age groups and socio-demographic strata. This information will be valuable for exposure and risk assessments.

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1016/j.fct.2010.08.004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The finding that education level correlates with frequency and amount of sunscreen use is concordant with a US study.

    “The results of this survey showing education level correlating with the frequency and amount of sunscreen use is concordant with the US study2”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, X. (., Bennett, D. H., Ritz, B., Cassady, D. L., Lee, K., & Hertz-Picciotto, I.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Bennett, Deborah H.
Venue
Food and Chemical Toxicology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-11
Volume
48
Issue
11
Pages
3109-3119
ISSN
0278-6915 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047630779
Cited by
130
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food and Chemical Toxicology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Keywords
personal care products, usage patterns, phthalates, brand loyalty, aerosol products, children's exposure, exposure assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, California, Child, Child, Preschool, Consumer Product Safety, Cosmetics, Environmental Exposure, Environmental Monitoring, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Assessment, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review