ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2019
NanoDefiner e-Tool: An Implemented Decision Support Framework for Nanomaterial Identification.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. 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.
- Representative Test Material for Validation of Density Separation as Part of Microplastic Quantification in Drinking Water.Polymers · 2025Article
- NanoDefiner Framework and e-Tool Revisited According to the European Commission's Nanomaterial Definition 2022/C 229/01.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Guidance on risk assessment of nanomaterials to be applied in the food and feed chain: human and animal health.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2021Article
- Regulatory landscape of nanotechnology and nanoplastics from a global perspective.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2021Review
- Reliable Surface Analysis Data of Nanomaterials in Support of Risk Assessment Based on Minimum Information Requirements.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The European Commission's recommendation on the definition of nanomaterial (2011/696/EU) established an applicable standard for material categorization. However, manufacturers face regulatory challenges during registration of their products. Reliable categorization is difficult and requires considerable expertise in existing measurement techniques (MTs). Additionally, organizational complexity is increased as different authorities' registration processes require distinct reporting. The NanoDefine project tackled these obstacles by providing the NanoDefiner e-tool: A decision support expert system for nanomaterial identification in a regulatory context. It provides MT recommendations for categorization of specific materials using a tiered approach (screening/confirmatory), and was constructed with experts from academia and industry to be extensible, interoperable, and adaptable for forthcoming revisions of the nanomaterial definition. An implemented MT-driven material categorization scheme allows detailed description. Its guided workflow is suitable for a variety of user groups. Direct feedback and explanation enable transparent decisions. Expert knowledge is held in a knowledge base for representation of MT performance criteria and physicochemical particle type properties. Continuous revision ensured data quality and validity. Recommendations were validated by independent case studies on industry-relevant particulate materials. Besides supporting material identification and registration, the free and open-source e-tool may serve as template for other expert systems within the nanoscience domain.
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.