ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2017
Occupational exposures and determinants of ultrafine particle concentrations during laser hair removal procedures.
Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Randomized Single-Center Proof of Principle Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of a Hydrogel Laser Treatment Patch in Laser Hair Removal.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Trial
- Aesthetic Procedures and Psychological Wellbeing in Saudi College Students: An In-Depth Exploration.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2024Article
- Laser-Induced Smoke in Dermatologic Practice: A Survey to Explore Hazard Perceptions, Safety Measures and Unmet Needs.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2022Article
- COVID-19 Pandemic: Consensus guidelines for preferred practices in an aesthetic clinic.Dermatologic therapy · 2020Review
- In vitro toxicological evaluation of surgical smoke from human tissue.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOccupational exposures to ultrafine particles in the plume generated during laser hair removal procedures, the most commonly performed light based cosmetic procedure, have not been thoroughly characterized. Acute and chronic exposures to ambient ultrafine particles have been associated with a number of negative respiratory and cardiovascular health effects. Thus, the aim of this study was to measure airborne concentrations of particles in a diameter size range of 10 nm to 1 μm in procedure rooms during laser hair removal procedures.
methodsTSI Model 3007 Condensation Particle Counters were used to quantify the particle count concentrations in the waiting and procedure rooms of a dermatology office. Particle concentrations were sampled before, during, and after laser hair removal procedures, and characteristics of each procedure were noted by the performing dermatologist.
resultsTwelve procedures were sampled over 4 days. Mean ultrafine particle concentrations in the waiting and procedure rooms were 14,957.4 particles/cm
conclusionsLaser hair removal procedures can generate high exposures to ultrafine particles for dermatologists and other individuals performing laser hair removal, with exposure varying based on multiple determinants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.