Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27761772›Full record

ArticleCytotechnology2016

Toxicity of antimony, copper, cobalt, manganese, titanium and zinc oxide nanoparticles for the alveolar and intestinal epithelial barrier cells in vitro.

T Titma, R Shimmo, J Siigur, A Kahru

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cytotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Copper-induced non-monotonic dose response in Caco-2 cells.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2019
    Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

T TitmaLaboratory of Environmental Toxicology, National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Akadeemia tee 23, 12618, Tallinn, Estonia. tiina.titma@tlu.ee.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4935-8914
R ShimmoSchool of Natural Sciences and Health, Tallinn University, Narva mnt. 25, 10120, Tallinn, Estonia.
J SiigurLaboratory of Bioorganic Chemistry, National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Akadeemia tee 23, 12618, Tallinn, Estonia.
A KahruLaboratory of Environmental Toxicology, National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Akadeemia tee 23, 12618, Tallinn, Estonia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heavy metals are found naturally on Earth and exposure to them in the living environment is increasing as a consequence of human activity. The toxicity of six different metal oxide nanoparticles (NP) at different points in time was compared using resazurin assay. After incubating Caco2 and A549 cells with 100 μg/mL of Sb

Indexed as

A549 cellsCaco2 cellsLong term viabilityMetal oxide nanoparticlesNon-monotonic dose–response (NMDR)Transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER)

Identifiers

PMID27761772
PMCPMC5101306

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.