ArticleEcotoxicology and environmental safety2020
Analysis of model PM
Article in Ecotoxicology and environmental safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impacts of Household Solid Fuel Combustion on Blood Pressure: Mechanisms and Implications.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Bridging Nanomanufacturing and Artificial Intelligence-A Comprehensive Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Application of Computing as a High-Practicability and -Efficiency Auxiliary Tool in Nanodrugs Discovery.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Integrating structure annotation and machine learning approaches to develop graphene toxicity models.Carbon · 2023Article
- Nanosafety: An Evolving Concept to Bring the Safest Possible Nanomaterials to Society and Environment.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- Significance between air pollutants, meteorological factors, and COVID-19 infections: probable evidences in India.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Construction of a web-based nanomaterial database by big data curation and modeling friendly nanostructure annotations.Nature communications · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Health risks induced by PM2.5 have become one of the major concerns among living populations, especially in regions facing serious pollution such as China and India. Furthermore, the composition of PM2.5 is complex and it also varies with time and locations. To facilitate our understanding of PM2.5-induced toxicity, a predictive modeling framework was developed in the present study. The core of this study was 1) to construct a virtual carbon nanoparticle library based on the experimental data to simulate the PM2.5 structures; 2) to quantify the nanoparticle structures by novel nanodescriptors; and 3) to perform computational modeling for critical toxicity endpoints. The virtual carbon nanoparticle library was developed to represent the nanostructures of 20 carbon nanoparticles, which were synthesized to simulate PM2.5 structures and tested for potential health risks. Based on the calculated nanodescriptors from virtual carbon nanoparticles, quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship (QNAR) models were developed to predict cytotoxicity and four different inflammatory responses induced by model PM2.5. The high predictability (R
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.