ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2014
Trends in arsenic levels in PM10 and PM 2.5 aerosol fractions in an industrialized area.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics, source apportionment, and health risk assessment of heavy metal pollution in soil of jiangmen, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Metals in coarse ambient aerosol as markers for source apportionment and their health risk assessment over an eastern coastal urban atmosphere in India.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2021Article
- Large global variations in measured airborne metal concentrations driven by anthropogenic sources.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Exposure to inhalable aerosols and their chemical characteristics from different potential factors in urban office environments.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
- Estimation of Inorganic Arsenic Exposure in Populations With Frequent Seafood Intake: Evidence From MESA and NHANES.American journal of epidemiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arsenic is a toxic element that affects human health and is widely distributed in the environment. In the area of study, the main Spanish and second largest European industrial ceramic cluster, the main source of arsenic aerosol is related to the impurities in some boracic minerals used in the ceramic process. Epidemiological studies on cancer occurrence in Spain points out the study region as one with the greater risk of cancer. Concentrations of particulate matter and arsenic content in PM10 and PM2.5 were measured and characterized by ICP-MS in the area of study during the years 2005-2010. Concentrations of PM10 and its arsenic content range from 27 to 46 μg/m(3) and from 0.7 to 6 ng/m(3) in the industrial area, respectively, and from 25 to 40 μg/m(3) and from 0.7 to 2.8 ng/m(3) in the urban area, respectively. Concentrations of PM2.5 and its arsenic content range from 12 to 14 μg/m(3) and from 0.5 to 1.4 ng/m(3) in the urban background area, respectively. Most of the arsenic content is present in the fine fraction, with ratios of PM2.5/PM10 in the range of 0.65-0.87. PM10, PM2.5, and its arsenic content show a sharp decrease in recent years associated with the economic downturn, which severely hit the production of ceramic materials in the area under study. The sharp production decrease due to the economic crisis combined with several technological improvements in recent years such as substitution of boron, which contains As impurities as raw material, have reduced the concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and As in air to an extent that currently meets the existing European regulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23842861What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.