Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32224954›Full record

ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Evaluation of Ecotoxicology Assessment Methods of Nanomaterials and Their Effects.

Bianca-Vanesa Boros, Vasile Ostafe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Recent Progress in Antimicrobial Nanomaterials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  16. Nanotechnology for Environmental and Biomedical Research.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Nanotoxicology and Nanosafety: Safety-By-Design and Testing at a Glance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Bianca-Vanesa BorosAdvanced Environmental Research Laboratories, Department of Biology-Chemistry, West University of Timisoara, Oituz 4, 300086 Timisoara, Romania.
Vasile OstafeAdvanced Environmental Research Laboratories, Department of Biology-Chemistry, West University of Timisoara, Oituz 4, 300086 Timisoara, Romania.

Funding

UEFISCDI (for ERA-Net COFASP) PN3-P3-285/14/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper describes the ecotoxicological effects of nanomaterials (NMs) as well as their testing methods. Standard ecotoxicity testing methods are applicable to nanomaterials as well but require some adaptation. We have taken into account methods that meet several conditions. They must be properly researched by a minimum of ten scientific articles where adaptation of the method to the NMs is also presented; use organisms suitable for simple and rapid ecotoxicity testing (SSRET); have a test period shorter than 30 days; require no special equipment; have low costs and have the possibility of optimization for high-throughput screening. From the standard assays described in guidelines developed by organizations such as Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and United States Environmental Protection Agency, which meet the required conditions, we selected as methods adaptable for NMs, some methods based on algae, duckweed, amphipods, daphnids, chironomids, terrestrial plants, nematodes and earthworms. By analyzing the effects of NMs on a wide range of organisms, it has been observed that these effects can be of several categories, such as behavioral, morphological, cellular, molecular or genetic effects. By comparing the EC

Indexed as

ecotoxicological test batteriesecotoxicologynanomaterialsorganisms suitable for simple and rapid ecotoxicity testing SSRET

Identifiers

PMID32224954
PMCPMC7221575

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.