Global programs / Feed the future innovation lab for collaborative research on peanut productivity and mycotoxin control (PMIL)
<span style="font-size: 13.3333px;">Dried blood spots (DBS) were proposed as potentially viable method for exposure assessment of environmental toxicants in infant and young children. DEC abstract (PA-00N-76W)
Key awd:ECG-A-00-00001
22 facts shown; 0 unconfirmed links; 0 support mechanisms (not programs); 2 documents cite this program.
The one-paragraph answer: years, implementer, funder and purpose, each from document metadata.
<span style="font-size: 13.3333px;">Dried blood spots (DBS) were proposed as potentially viable method for exposure assessment of environmental toxicants in infant and young children. For this study, we validated an experimental protocol to quantify AFB1-lysine adduct in DBS samples of AFB1-treated F344 rats, as well as samples from human field study. Significant dose-response relationships in AFB1-lysine adduct formation were found in DBS samples of rats treated with single- and repeated-dose AFB1. AFB1-lysine levels in DBS samples were highly correlated with corresponding serum sample levels. The Person coefficients were 0.997 for the single-dose exposure, and 0.996 for the repeated-dose exposure. Levels of AFB1-lysine adduct had also good agreement between DBS and serum samples as shown by Bland-Altman plot analysis. For human field study samples (n ¼ 36), a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.784 was found between AFB1-lysine adduct levels of DBS and corresponding serum samples. Bland-Altman plots showed the distribution of the log differences between DBS and serum AFB1-lysine levels are within 95% confidence intervals. These results showed AFB1-lysine adduct levels in
Source: DEC abstract, PA-00N-76W (2016). This is the source's own text, not a cited summary of the documents.
Operated in: Uganda, Mozambique.
Districts, regions and facilities the program's own documents name, with what the document says it did there. Source: sentences in the program's documents
not in the map yet: no district, region or facility is named for this program yet; only Malawi and Guatemala have place data so far
No district, region or facility is named in this program's documents yet. Place dots exist for Malawi and Guatemala only so far. Towns and natural features are not drawn.
Countries where this program operated, set by the countries its documents name most often. Countries only tagged on documents are listed apart. Source: document tags, scope rule
Scope: global. Set by the countries the program's documents name most often. Low confidence.
How sure we are: 0.444.
When the program ran, from its start year to the latest document year. A hatched bar means the start is our estimate. Source: award and document years
Axis: award years, end from years in documents. The start year comes from award fiscal year; the end is the latest document year, so the program may have run longer.
Who started the program, and which administration it began under. Timing only; it does not say who started it. Source: initiative records, start year
Organizations that ran this program, from award records and document authors. Prime and sub roles are not split yet. Source: award and document records
Named as an institutional author on documents; whether prime, sub or consortium member is not recorded. Basis: read from a record field
| Name | Role | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Georgia. College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences | implementer | 2017 | Stated in a document | 1 source |
| University of Georgia | implementer | 2016 | Stated in a document |
Identifiers of the awards and the organizations that funded it. Amounts are under Money. Source: award records
| Name | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| ECG-A-07-00-00001 (task order, FY2000) | 2016 to 2017 | Stated in a document read from a record field | 2 sources |
Basis: read from a record field
| Name | Years | Basis | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAID. Bur. for Food Security | 2016 | Stated in a document |
Labels on the program's documents, not a description of what the program did. Source: DEC document tags
Sector profile (computed): Agriculture: crop production, inputs, pests, irrigation 35%; Health systems, policy and finance (general health) 35%; Agriculture: research, extension, training, technology 8%
DEC topic and subject tags. They describe the documents, not what the program was. Each tag opens its evidence in the drawer.
Programs worth reading next, by topic, implementer, country and years. Similar by facets (topic, implementer, country, years) and, when available, description. It says the programs look alike, not how they are related in time. Source: catalog facets
Looking for similar programs.
Not recorded yet: support mechanisms, money rows, evaluations and lessons. A missing record is not a finding. USAspending records start in FY2007; earlier obligations are missing, not zero.
Every document that cites this program, grouped by a stage label from a weak classifier. Source: document library
| 1 source |
None recorded. Evaluation studies linked to this program are listed under Evaluations and lessons.
None recorded for this program. A counterpart appears only when a document names the government body and its role.
| 1 source |
| USAID. Bur. for Food Security. Ofc. of Agricultural Research and Policy | 2017 | Stated in a document | 1 source |