Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21635194›Full record

ArticleCritical reviews in toxicology2011

Identifying an indoor air exposure limit for formaldehyde considering both irritation and cancer hazards.

Robert Golden

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical reviews in toxicology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 193 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Formaldehyde and asthma: a plausibility?Archives of toxicology · 2025
    Review
  5. Design Principles From Natural Olfaction for Electronic Noses.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Toxicological Effects of Secondary Air Pollutants.Chemical research in Chinese universities · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert GoldenToxLogic LLC, Potomac, Maryland 20854, USA. rgolden124@aol.com
Potomac Photonics (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Formaldehyde is a well-studied chemical and effects from inhalation exposures have been extensively characterized in numerous controlled studies with human volunteers, including asthmatics and other sensitive individuals, which provide a rich database on exposure concentrations that can reliably produce the symptoms of sensory irritation. Although individuals can differ in their sensitivity to odor and eye irritation, the majority of authoritative reviews of the formaldehyde literature have concluded that an air concentration of 0.3 ppm will provide protection from eye irritation for virtually everyone. A weight of evidence-based formaldehyde exposure limit of 0.1 ppm (100 ppb) is recommended as an indoor air level for all individuals for odor detection and sensory irritation. It has recently been suggested by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) that formaldehyde is causally associated with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) and leukemia. This has led US EPA to conclude that irritation is not the most sensitive toxic endpoint and that carcinogenicity should dictate how to establish exposure limits for formaldehyde. In this review, a number of lines of reasoning and substantial scientific evidence are described and discussed, which leads to a conclusion that neither point of contact nor systemic effects of any type, including NPC or leukemia, are causally associated with exposure to formaldehyde. This conclusion supports the view that the equivocal epidemiology studies that suggest otherwise are almost certainly flawed by identified or yet to be unidentified confounding variables. Thus, this assessment concludes that a formaldehyde indoor air limit of 0.1 ppm should protect even particularly susceptible individuals from both irritation effects and any potential cancer hazard.

Indexed as

Inhalation ExposureAir Pollution, IndoorCarcinomaFormaldehydeHumansIrritantsLeukemiaNasopharyngeal CarcinomaNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsProportional Hazards ModelsRisk AssessmentFormaldehydeIrritants

Identifiers

PMID21635194
PMCPMC3175005
OpenAlexW2012006041

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.