Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28554660›Full record

ReviewToxicology and applied pharmacology2017

Nanotechnology in agriculture: Opportunities, toxicological implications, and occupational risks.

Ivo Iavicoli, Veruscka Leso, Donald H Beezhold, Anna A Shvedova

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed
15.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 622 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ivo IavicoliDepartment of Public Health, Division of Occupational Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via S. Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy. Electronic address: ivo.iavicoli@unina.it.
Veruscka LesoDepartment of Public Health, Division of Occupational Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via S. Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Donald H BeezholdNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1095 Willowdale Rd., Morgantown, WV, United States.
Anna A ShvedovaNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1095 Willowdale Rd., Morgantown, WV, United States; Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center, P.O. Box 9229, Morgantown, WV, United States.
Federico II University Hospital · ITNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · USUniversity of Naples Federico II · ITWest Virginia University · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnology has the potential to make a beneficial impact on several agricultural, forestry, and environmental challenges, such as urbanization, energy constraints, and sustainable use of resources. However, new environmental and human health hazards may emerge from nano-enhanced applications. This raises concerns for agricultural workers who may become primarily exposed to such xenobiotics during their job tasks. The aim of this review is to discuss promising solutions that nanotechnology may provide in agricultural activities, with a specific focus on critical aspects, challenging issues, and research needs for occupational risk assessment and management in this emerging field. Eco-toxicological aspects were not the focus of the review. Nano-fertilizers, (nano-sized nutrients, nano-coated fertilizers, or engineered metal-oxide or carbon-based nanomaterials per se), and nano-pesticides, (nano-formulations of traditional active ingredients or inorganic nanomaterials), may provide a targeted/controlled release of agrochemicals, aimed to obtain their fullest biological efficacy without over-dosage. Nano-sensors and nano-remediation methods may detect and remove environmental contaminants. However, limited knowledge concerning nanomaterial biosafety, adverse effects, fate, and acquired biological reactivity once dispersed into the environment, requires further scientific efforts to assess possible nano-agricultural risks. In this perspective, toxicological research should be aimed to define nanomaterial hazards and levels of exposure along the life-cycle of nano-enabled products, and to assess those physico-chemical features affecting nanomaterial toxicity, possible interactions with agro-system co-formulants, and stressors. Overall, this review highlights the importance to define adequate risk management strategies for workers, occupational safety practices and policies, as well as to develop a responsible regulatory consensus on nanotechnology in agriculture.

Indexed as

FarmersOccupational HealthAgricultural Workers' DiseasesAgricultureAgrochemicalsAnimalsDiffusion of InnovationEnvironmental MonitoringHumansNanoparticlesNanotechnologyOccupational ExposureRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAgrochemicalsNanocelluloseNano-enabled agrochemicalsNano-enhanced environmental remediationNanotechnologyNanotoxicologyOccupational risk assessment and management

Identifiers

PMID28554660
PMCPMC6380358
OpenAlexW2619318948

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.