Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41180360›Full record

ReviewBMJ public health2025

Gender, self-care and toxic exposures: a narrative review of personal care product use and health equity implications.

Eleni Prifti, Austen El-Osta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eleni PriftiChemistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens School of Science, Athens, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3401-2813
Austen El-OstaImperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8772-4938

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Personal care products (PCPs) are widely used across populations, yet their composition includes a range of hazardous chemicals that pose risks to human health and the environment. Emerging evidence highlights how PCP-related exposures are not evenly distributed, but shaped by intersecting forces of gender, race and social inequality. Despite being framed as tools for empowerment and wellness, PCPs may contribute to disproportionate toxic exposures, particularly for women and girls. Objective: This narrative review critically examines the environmental health implications of gendered self-care practices through the lens of PCP use. It synthesises current evidence on chemical exposures, identifies high-risk subgroups, explores mechanisms of harm and outlines implications for regulation, clinical practice and environmental health literacy. Methods: Drawing on interdisciplinary peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2025, the review focuses on endocrine-disrupting chemicals, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, volatile organic compounds, heavy metals and microparticles and nanoparticles commonly found in PCPs. Particular attention is given to vulnerable populations, including beauty salon workers, pregnant individuals, adolescents, women of colour and infants. Findings: PCP use results in chronic low-level exposure to multiple hazardous compounds via dermal, inhalation and mucosal routes. These exposures have been linked to adverse reproductive, developmental and metabolic outcomes, increasing the risks of non-communicable diseases like cancer and obesity and possibly affecting infertility rates. Early evidence shows that interventions such as product substitution can yield rapid reductions in internal toxicant levels. However, individual behaviour change alone is insufficient to address systemic disparities in exposure risk. Conclusions: Self-care must be reframed as a public health and environmental justice issue. Stronger regulatory oversight, clinician education and population-level environmental health literacy are urgently needed to reduce harmful exposures. Equitable self-care should prioritise not only personal choice, but also structural accountability and collective safety.

Indexed as

Body BurdenEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental MedicinePublic HealthSociodemographic Factors

Identifiers

PMID41180360
PMCPMC12574390

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.