Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21176150›Full record

ReviewParticle and fibre toxicology2010

Risks from accidental exposures to engineered nanoparticles and neurological health effects: a critical review.

Myrtill Simkó, Mats-Olof Mattsson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 181 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Nanoparticles: Taking a Unique Position in Medicine.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Could the Olfactory System Be a Target for Homeopathic Remedies as Nanomedicines?Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Progress ofToxicology research · 2017
    Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Myrtill SimkóAustrian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria. msimko@oeaw.ac.at
Mats-Olof Mattsson
Austrian Institute of Technology · ATInstitute of Technology Assessment · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are certain concerns regarding the safety for the environment and human health from the use of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) which leads to unintended exposures, as opposed to the use of ENPs for medical purposes. This review focuses on the unintended human exposure of ENPs. In particular, possible effects in the brain are discussed and an attempt to assess risks is performed.Animal experiments have shown that investigated ENPs (metallic nanoparticles, quantum dots, carbon nanotubes) can translocate to the brain from different entry points (skin, blood, respiratory pathways). After inhalation or instillation into parts of the respiratory tract a very small fraction of the inhaled or instilled ENPs reaches the blood and subsequently secondary organs, including the CNS, at a low translocation rate. Experimental in vivo and in vitro studies have shown that several types of ENPs can have various biological effects in the nervous system. Some of these effects could also imply that ENPs can cause hazards, both acutely and in the long term. The relevance of these data for risk assessment is far from clear. There are at present very few data on exposure of the general public to either acute high dose exposure or on chronic exposure to low levels of air-borne ENPs. It is furthermore unlikely that acute high dose exposures would occur. The risk from such exposures for damaging CNS effects is thus probably very low, irrespective of any biological hazard associated with ENPs.The situation is more complicated regarding chronic exposures, at low doses. The long term accumulation of ENPs can not be excluded. However, we do not have exposure data for the general public regarding ENPs. Although translocation to the brain via respiratory organs and the circulation appears to be very low, there remains a possibility that chronic exposures, and/or biopersistent ENPs, can influence processes within the brain that are triggering or aggravating pathological processes.In general, the present state of knowledge is unsatisfactory for a proper risk assessment in this area. Crucial deficits include lack of exposure data, the absence of a proper dose concept, and that studies often fail in adequate description of the investigated ENPs.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringInhalation ExposureAir PollutantsAnimalsBiological TransportBlood-Brain BarrierBrainDrug Delivery SystemsHumansNanoparticlesPublic HealthRespiratory SystemRisk AssessmentAir Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID21176150
PMCPMC3016300
OpenAlexW2126088310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.