ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017
Fine and ultrafine particle doses in the respiratory tract from digital printing operations.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Dust, Chemical, Microbiological Pollutions and Microclimatic Parameters of Indoor Air in Sports Facilities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Assessment of indoor air quality in health clubs: insights into (ultra)fine and coarse particles and gaseous pollutants.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Electrostatic fine particles emitted from laser printers as potential vectors for airborne transmission of COVID-19.Environmental chemistry letters · 2021Review
- TMT-Based Quantitative Proteomics Analysis Reveals Airborne PMInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Submicron particle number doses in the human respiratory tract: implications for urban traffic and background environments.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
- Evaluation of nanoparticle emissions from a laser printer in an experimental chamber and estimation of the human particle dose.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we report for the first time particle number doses in different parts of the human respiratory tract and real-time deposition rates for particles in the 10 nm to 10 μm size range emitted by digital printing operations. Particle number concentrations (PNCs) and size distribution were measured in a typical small-sized printing house using a NanoScan scanning mobility particle sizer and an optical particle sizer. Particle doses in human lung were estimated applying a multiple-path particle dosimetry model under two different breathing scenarios. PNC was dominated by the ultrafine particle fractions (UFPs, i.e., particles smaller than 100 nm) exhibiting almost nine times higher levels in comparison to the background values. The average deposition rate fοr each scenario in the whole lung was estimated at 2.0 and 2.9 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
27848134What 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.