ArticleToxicology reports2020
Comparative and cumulative quantitative risk assessments on a novel heated tobacco product versus the 3R4F reference cigarette.
Article in Toxicology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Assessment Models for Heated Tobacco Products.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026Article
- Review
- Extraction of tobacco extract from discarded tobacco leaves for cigarette yarns dyeing and neophytadiene separation.Frontiers in chemistry · 2025Article
- Challenges in Predicting the Change in the Cumulative Exposure of New Tobacco and Related Products Based on Emissions and Toxicity Dose-Response Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Incidence trends in bladder and lung cancers between Denmark, Finland and Sweden may implicate oral tobacco (snuff/snus) as a possible risk factor.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- A randomized controlled study in healthy participants to explore the exposure continuum when smokers switch to a tobacco heating product or an E-cigarette relative to cessation.Toxicology reports · 2021Article
- Systematic review of biomarker findings from clinical studies of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products.Toxicology reports · 2021Review
- Comparative and cumulative quantitative risk assessments on a novel heated tobacco product versus the 3R4F reference cigarette.Toxicology reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel tobacco products that heat rather than burn tobacco (heated tobacco products or HTPs) have been shown to produce lower levels of harmful and potentially harmful constituents than conventional combusted cigarettes. The present study uses a quantitative risk assessment approach to compare non-cancer and cancer risk estimates for emissions generated by an HTP with smoke from a reference cigarette (3R4F). Fifty-four analytes were evaluated from the HTP aerosol and the 3R4F cigarette smoke. Emissions were generated using the ISO and the Health Canada Intense smoking regimes. The measured values were extrapolated to define a conservative exposure assumption for per day use and lifetime use based on an estimated maximum usage level of 400 puffs per day
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.