ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental hygiene2014
Assessment of respirable crystalline silica analysis using Proficiency Analytical Testing results from 2003-2013.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 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.
- Comparison of the Analysis of Respirable Crystalline Silica in Workplace Air by Direct-on-Filter Methods using X-ray Diffraction and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy.Annals of work exposures and health · 2022Article
- Recent Advances in Occupational Exposure Assessment of Aerosols.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
- Letter to the Editor: Preparation of respirable crystalline silica samples for subsequent analysis.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2017Article
- Silica Measurement with High Flow Rate Respirable Size Selective Samplers: A Field Study.The Annals of occupational hygiene · 2016Article
- Promoting early exposure monitoring for respirable crystalline silica: Taking the laboratory to the mine site.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Analysis of Proficiency Analytical Testing (PAT) results between 2003 and 2013 suggest that the variation in respirable crystalline silica analysis is much smaller today than it was in the period 1990-1998, partly because of a change in sample production procedure and because the colorimetric method has been phased out, although quality improvements in the x-ray diffraction (XRD) or infrared (IR) methods may have also played a role. There is no practical difference between laboratories using XRD or IR methods or between laboratories which are accredited or those which are not. Reference laboratory means (assigned values) are not different from the means of all participants across the current range of mass loading, although there is a small difference in variance in the ratios of all participants to reference laboratory means based on method because the reference laboratories are much more likely to use XRD than are the others. Matrix interference does not lead to biases or substantially larger variances for either XRD or IR methods. Data from proficiency test sample analyses that include results from poorly performing laboratories should not be used to determine the validity of a method. PAT samples are not produced below 40 μg and variance may increase with lower masses, although this is not particularly predictable. PAT data from lower mass loadings will be required to evaluate analytical performance if exposure limits are lowered without change in sampling method. Task-specific exposure measurements for periods shorter than a full shift typically result in lower mass loadings and the quality of these analyses would also be better assured from being within the range of PAT mass loadings. High flow rate cyclones, whose performance has been validated, can be used to obtain higher mass loadings in environments of lower concentrations or where shorter sampling times are desired.
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.