Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25571860›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental geochemistry and health2015

Multi-pathway assessment of human health risk posed by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Changsheng Qu, Bing Li, Haisuo Wu, Shui Wang, John P Giesy

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Estimation of decrease in cancer risk by biodegradation of PAHs content from an urban traffic soil.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Changsheng QuKey Laboratory of Environmental Engineering, Jiangsu Academy of Environmental Science, Nanjing, 210036, China, 031202026@163.com.
Bing Li
Haisuo Wu
Shui Wang
John P Giesy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess aggregate exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) via several environmental media and pathways, a probabilistic framework for multi-pathway health risk assessment that integrates PAHs potency equivalence factors, risk estimation modeling, and Monte Carlo simulation was applied to a case study in Nanjing, which is an important industrial city in China. Incremental lifetime risk of additional cancers posed by exposure to 16 USEPA priority PAHs in air, water, soil, and fish was assessed. Risks to three age groups, infants, children, and adults, through various exposure pathways, including oral ingestion, dermal absorption, and inhalation, were estimated. Results of the analysis of risk indicated that B[a]P, B[b]F, and BA were the predominant PAHs pollutants in Nanjing. Risk of additional cancer for local adults was on average 2.62 × 10(-5). The risks were primarily due to ingestion of fish and inhalation, which contributed 99 % of the total risks. By contrast, risk to infants was essentially negligible. Results of a sensitivity analysis indicated that the input variables of concentration of PAHs in fish (C f), the body weight (BW), and the ingestion rate of fish (IRf) were the major influences on estimates of risks.

Indexed as

AdultAir PollutionAnimalsChildChinaCitiesEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutionFemaleFishesFoodborne DiseasesFood ContaminationHumansInfantMaleMonte Carlo MethodPolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsSoil Pollutants

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.