Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25717342›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2015

Tobacco smoke particles and indoor air quality (ToPIQ-II) - a modified study protocol and first results.

Alexander Gerber, Alexander V Hofen-Hohloch, Johannes Schulze, David A Groneberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Inhaled Pollutants of the Gero-Exposome and Later-Life Health.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Epidemiology of neonatal infections in hospitals of Nepal: evidence from a large- scale study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Providing a Clean Environment for Adolescents: Evaluation of the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act in Taiwan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Alexander GerberInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Haus 9b, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Alexander V Hofen-HohlochInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Haus 9b, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Johannes SchulzeInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Haus 9b, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
David A GronebergInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe-University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Haus 9b, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnvironmental tobacco smoke (ETS)-associated particulate matter (PM) has to be seen as an independent health hazard and needs to be discussed separately from the already well-known toxic and carcinogenic compounds contained in cigarette smoke. We believe that brand-specific amounts of PM are of public interest and should be investigated.

methodsAn automatic environmental tobacco smoke emitter was developed and placed into a glass-chamber to generate cigarette smoke as reliably as possible. Cigarettes were smoked automatically according to a standardized protocol. Mean concentrations (Cmean) and area under the curve (AUC) of PM2.5 released by the brands P&S, Virginia (without filter) and the 3R4F standard research cigarette of the University of Kentucky, USA, were measured and compared with each other.

resultsCmean PM2.5 of 3R4F reference was 1,725 μg/m(3), for P&S: 1,982 μg/m(3) and for Virginia without filter: 1,525 μg/m(3). AUC PM2.5 for 3R4F reference was: 527,644 μg/m(3)×sec, for P&S: 606,171 μg/m(3)×sec, and for Virginia without filter: 464,788 μg/m(3)×sec.

conclusionsOur modified ToPIQ-II study protocol shows significant brand-specific differences in the amounts of PM2.5 released by cigarettes into the environment, when compared to 3R4F reference cigarettes. We believe that information about PM-release of all relevant brands in relation to reference cigarettes should be published. In the light of PM as an independent risk factor for morbidity and mortality, this may serve as a basis for further epidemiologic investigations.

Indexed as

Automatic environmental tobacco smoke emitterCigarettesParticulate matter

Identifiers

PMID25717342
PMCPMC4339475

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.