Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33038363›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental research2021

A comprehensive risk assessment of toxic elements in international brands of face foundation powders.

Basem Shomar, Sergey N Rashkeev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Environmental impact of the barrage construction on groundwater.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Multielement determination (essential and potentially toxic elements) in eye shadows exposed to consumption in Brazil using ICP OES.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
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.

Basem ShomarQatar Environment and Energy Research Institute, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, P. O. Box 31110, Doha, Qatar. Electronic address: bshomar@hbku.edu.qa.
Sergey N RashkeevQatar Environment and Energy Research Institute, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, P. O. Box 31110, Doha, Qatar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the COVID-19 pandemic and wearing masks in many countries, women are keen on elegance, beauty and the use of face foundations. Assessment of health risks associated with the regular use of face foundation by females is dynamic due to the emerging products. The most common international 14 brands of face foundation powders were collected and the concentrations of different elements (Ag, Al, As, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, P, Pb, Sb, Se, Sn, V and Zn) in each sample were determined. A combined approach merging the conventional and computational tools was used for investigating the risk of exposure to toxic elements. Monte Carlo simulations were applied to calculate risks associated with twenty elements. We attempted different probability distribution functions for concentrations because the actual distribution functions are not known, and the only data available are the mean value and standard deviation of concentrations obtained from experiment. Our results indicate that the total non-carcinogenic health risk through exposure to different elements (Hazardous Index, HI) does not strongly depend on the choice of the probability distribution function for the concentrations. We also show that taking into account probability distributions of other variables and parameters such as body weight, exposed skin area, skin adhesion, etc. does not significantly change the main result rather just slightly broadening the final Hazardous Index distribution function. We found that calculated HI is well below unity for all considered samples, i.e., the dermal exposure to toxic elements in the considered facial powders is negligible and the considered face foundation powders are quite safe to use.

Indexed as

COVID-19Trace ElementsFemaleHumansPandemicsPowdersRisk AssessmentSARS-CoV-2PowdersTrace ElementsFace foundation powderMonte Carlo simulationsRisk assessmentToxic elements

Identifiers

PMID33038363
PMCPMC7543708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.