Needs and challenges for assessing the environmental impacts of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs).

Michelle Romero-Franco, Hilary A Godwin, Muhammad Bilal, Yoram Cohen

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in Beilstein journal of nanotechnology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

Nanopore-based metagenomic analysis of the impact of nanoparticles on soil microbial communities.Heliyon · 2022
Article
Risk Assessment of Nano-Flame Retardants Coating in the Selected Construction Industry of Iran by Control Banding Approach.International journal of preventive medicine · 2021
Article
Toward the Development and Application of an Environmental Risk Assessment Framework for Microplastic.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2019
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.

Michelle Romero-FrancoUniversity of California Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology, University of California, Los Angeles 6522 CNSI Building, 570 Westwood Plaza Box 957227 Los Angeles, CA 90095-7227, USA.

Hilary A GodwinUniversity of California Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology, University of California, Los Angeles 6522 CNSI Building, 570 Westwood Plaza Box 957227 Los Angeles, CA 90095-7227, USA.

Muhammad BilalUniversity of California Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology, University of California, Los Angeles 6522 CNSI Building, 570 Westwood Plaza Box 957227 Los Angeles, CA 90095-7227, USA.

Yoram CohenUniversity of California Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology, University of California, Los Angeles 6522 CNSI Building, 570 Westwood Plaza Box 957227 Los Angeles, CA 90095-7227, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential environmental impact of nanomaterials is a critical concern and the ability to assess these potential impacts is top priority for the progress of sustainable nanotechnology. Risk assessment tools are needed to enable decision makers to rapidly assess the potential risks that may be imposed by engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), particularly when confronted by the reality of limited hazard or exposure data. In this review, we examine a range of available risk assessment frameworks considering the contexts in which different stakeholders may need to assess the potential environmental impacts of ENMs. Assessment frameworks and tools that are suitable for the different decision analysis scenarios are then identified. In addition, we identify the gaps that currently exist between the needs of decision makers, for a range of decision scenarios, and the abilities of present frameworks and tools to meet those needs.

Indexed as

engineered nanomaterialsenvironmental impactsrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID28546894

DOI10.3762/bjnano.8.101

PMCPMC5433198

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.