Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 761

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Critical Review of Biomarkers Used for Monitoring Human Exposure to Lead: Advantages, Limitations, and Future Needs

Open access
Barbosa, Fernando, Tanus-Santos, José Eduardo, Gerlach, Raquel Fernanda, Parsons, Patrick J.·2005·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

Lead concentration in whole blood (BPb) is the primary biomarker used to monitor exposure to this metallic element. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization define a BPb of 10 microg/dL (0.48 micromol/L) as the threshold of concern in young children. However, recent studies have reported the possibility of adverse health effects, including intellectual impairment in young children, at BPb levels < 10 microg/dL, suggesting that there is no safe level of exposure. It appears impossible to differentiate between low-level chronic Pb exposure and a high-level short Pb exposure based on a single BPb measurement; therefore, serial BPb measurements offer a better estimation of possible health outcomes. The difficulty in assessing the exact nature of Pb exposure is dependent not so much on problems with current analytical methodologies, but rather on the complex toxicokinetics of Pb within various body compartments (i.e., cycling of Pb between bone, blood, and soft tissues). If we are to differentiate more effectively between Pb stored in the body for years and Pb from recent exposure, information on other biomarkers of exposure may be needed. None of the current biomarkers of internal Pb dose have yet been accepted by the scientific community as a reliable substitute for a BPb measurement. This review focuses on the limitations of biomarkers of Pb exposure and the need to improve the accuracy of their measurement. We present here only the traditional analytical protocols in current use, and we attempt to assess the influence of confounding variables on BPb levels. Finally, we discuss the interpretation of BPb data with respect to both external and endogenous Pb exposure, past or recent exposure, as well as the significance of Pb determinations in human specimens including hair, nails, saliva, bone, blood (plasma, whole blood), urine, feces, and exfoliated teeth.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1289/ehp.7917

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 761

Metadata

Authors
Barbosa, F., Tanus-Santos, J. E., Gerlach, R. F., & Parsons, P. J.
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
2005-12
Volume
113
Issue
12
Pages
1669-1674
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W2056694377
Cited by
761
References
1
FWCI
10.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Critical Review of Biomarkers Used for Monitoring Human Exposure to Lead: Advantages, Limitations, and Future Needs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.7917
The paper
Barbosa, F., Tanus-Santos, J. E., Gerlach, R. F., & Parsons, P. J. (2005). A Critical Review of Biomarkers Used for Monitoring Human Exposure to Lead: Advantages, Limitations, and Future Needs. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7917

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.