Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26908175›Full record

ArticleToxicology and applied pharmacology2016

Nanotoxicology ten years later: Lights and shadows.

Anna Shvedova, Antonio Pietroiusti, Valerian Kagan

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Nanotoxicology and Nanosafety: Safety-By-Design and Testing at a Glance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Neurotoxicity of Nanomaterials: An Up-to-Date Overview.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Opportunities and obstacles to the development of nanopharmaceuticals for human use.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2016
    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

3 authors.

Anna ShvedovaPathology and Physiology Research Branch, Health Effects Laboratory Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, USA; Department of Physiology & Pharmacology, WVU, Morgantown, WV, USA. Electronic address: ats1@cdc.gov.
Antonio PietroiustiDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Valerian KaganDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mounting societal concerns about possible and maybe even likely adverse effects of nanomaterials are reflected in a large and growing number of publications in the field of nanotoxicology. Indeed, today's search in PubMed reveals >3700 publications on the subject denoted by (toxic+nanomaterials) - quite a growth over the last decade that began with only two dozens of them up-to 2005.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansLightNanostructuresNanotechnologyParticle SizeGlobal representationNanomaterialsNanotechnologyNanotoxicology

Identifiers

PMID26908175
PMCPMC5370549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.