Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29662451›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2018

Risk Assessment and Risk Minimization in Nanomedicine: A Need for Predictive, Alternative, and 3Rs Strategies.

Lisa Accomasso, Caterina Cristallini, Claudia Giachino

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Nanomedicine Innovations for Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Lisa AccomassoDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Caterina CristalliniCNR, Institute for Chemical and Physical Processes IPCF, Pisa, Italy.
Claudia GiachinoDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of nanomaterials in medicine has grown very rapidly, leading to a concern about possible health risks. Surely, the application of nanotechnology in medicine has many significant potentialities as it can improve human health in at least three different ways: by contributing to early disease diagnosis, improved treatment outcomes and containment of health care costs. However, toxicology or safety assessment is an integral part of any new medical technology and the nanotechnologies are no exception. The principle aim of nanosafety studies in this frame is to enable safer design of nanomedicines. The most urgent need is finding and validating novel approaches able to extrapolate acute

Indexed as

nanomaterialnanomedicinenanosafetyrisk assessmentrisk minimization

Identifiers

PMID29662451
PMCPMC5890110

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.