Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24840353›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2014

Range-finding risk assessment of inhalation exposure to nanodiamonds in a laboratory environment.

Antti J Koivisto, Jaana E Palomäki, Anna-Kaisa Viitanen, Kirsi M Siivola, Ismo K Koponen, Mingzhou Yu, Tomi S Kanerva, Hannu Norppa, Harri T Alenius, Tareq Hussein and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Multi-instrument assessment of fine and ultrafine titanium dioxide aerosols.Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part A · 2023
    Article
  2. Measuring TiOToxics · 2022
    Article
  3. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Antti J KoivistoNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. joonas.koivisto@ttl.fi.
Jaana E PalomäkiNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. jaana.palomaki@tukes.fi.
Anna-Kaisa ViitanenNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. anna-kaisa.viitanen@ttl.fi.
Kirsi M SiivolaNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. kirsi.siivola@ttl.fi.
Ismo K KoponenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, Copenhagen DK-2100, Denmark. ikk@arbejdsmiljoforskning.dk.
Mingzhou YuInstitute of Earth Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Fenghui Road, Xi'an 710075, China. yumingzhou1738@yahoo.com.
Tomi S KanervaNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. tomi.kanerva@ttl.fi.
Hannu NorppaNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. hannu.norppa@ttl.fi.
Harri T AleniusNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. harri.alenius@ttl.fi.
Tareq HusseinDepartment of Physics, Faculty of Science, The University of Jordan, Amman JO-11942, Jordan. tareq.hussein@helsinki.fi.
Kai M SavolainenNanosafety Research Centre, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a A, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland. kirsi.siivola@ttl.fi.
Kaarle J HämeriDepartment of Physics, University of Helsinki, Gustaf Hällströmin Katu 2, P.O. Box 64, Helsinki FI-00014, Finland. kaarle.hameri@helsinki.fi.
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health · FIChinese Academy of Sciences · CNNational Research Centre for the Working Environment · DKUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Jordan · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study considers fundamental methods in occupational risk assessment of exposure to airborne engineered nanomaterials. We discuss characterization of particle emissions, exposure assessment, hazard assessment with in vitro studies, and risk range characterization using calculated inhaled doses and dose-response translated to humans from in vitro studies. Here, the methods were utilized to assess workers' risk range of inhalation exposure to nanodiamonds (NDs) during handling and sieving of ND powder. NDs were agglomerated to over 500 nm particles, and mean exposure levels of different work tasks varied from 0.24 to 4.96 µg·m(-3) (0.08 to 0.74 cm(-3)). In vitro-experiments suggested that ND exposure may cause a risk for activation of inflammatory cascade. However, risk range characterization based on in vitro dose-response was not performed because accurate assessment of delivered (settled) dose on the cells was not possible. Comparison of ND exposure with common pollutants revealed that ND exposure was below 5 μg·m(-3), which is one of the proposed exposure limits for diesel particulate matter, and the workers' calculated dose of NDs during the measurement day was 74 ng which corresponded to 0.02% of the modeled daily (24 h) dose of submicrometer urban air particles.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringInhalation ExposureOccupational ExposureAir Pollutants, OccupationalCell Line, TumorCell SurvivalCytokinesHumansNanodiamondsRisk AssessmentAir Pollutants, OccupationalCytokinesNanodiamonds

Identifiers

PMID24840353
PMCPMC4053885
OpenAlexW2041184425

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.