ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2014
Health risk analysis of atmospheric polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in big cities of China.
Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pregnancy Exposure to Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): Exploratory Comparative Levels in Blood Serum Samples from Different Regions in Antioquia, Colombia.Journal of xenobiotics · 2026Article
- Characterization and risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in urban atmospheric Particulate of Tehran, Iran.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016Article
- Effects of urbanization on gaseous and particulate polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated biphenyls in a coastal city, China: levels, sources, and health risks.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A probabilistic carcinogenic risk assessment of atmospheric polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in four big cities (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Xiamen) of China was carried out. PAHs levels in these cities were collected from published literatures and converted into BaP equivalent (BaPeq) concentrations. The health risk assessment models recommended by US EPA were applied to quantitatively characterize the health risk values of PAHs. Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis were applied to quantify uncertainties of risk assessment. The results showed that BaPeq concentrations of four cities were all higher than the newest limited value (1 ng/m(3)) of China. Health risk assessment indicated that atmospheric PAHs in Guangzhou and Xiamen posed no or little carcinogenic risk on local residents. However, the PAHs in Beijing and Shanghai posed potential carcinogenic risk for adults and lifetime exposure. Notwithstanding the uncertainties, this study provides the primary information on the carcinogenic risk of atmospheric PAHs in studied cities of China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.