ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Occupational Exposure to Ultrafine Particles in Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Qualitative and Quantitative Risk Assessment.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Occupational Exposure to Incidental Nanomaterials in Metal Additive Manufacturing: An Innovative Approach for Risk Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Two H13-Type Starting Materials Used for Laser Cladding and Aerosol Particles Formed in This Process.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrafine particles (UFPs) can be released unintentionally during metal additive manufacturing (AM). Experts agree on the urgent need to increase the knowledge of the emerging risk of exposure to nanoparticles, although different points of view have arisen on how to do so. This article presents a case study conducted on a metal AM facility, focused on studying the exposure to incidental metallic UFP. It intends to serve as a pilot study on the application of different methodologies to manage this occupational risk, using qualitative and quantitative approaches that have been used to study exposure to engineered nanoparticles. Quantitative data were collected using a condensation particle counter (CPC), showing the maximum particle number concentration in manual cleaning tasks. Additionally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray analyzer (EDS) measurements were performed, showing no significant change in the particles' chemical composition, size, or surface (rugosity) after printing. A qualitative approach was fulfilled using Control Banding Nanotool 2.0, which revealed different risk bands depending on the tasks performed. This article culminates in a critical analysis regarding the application of these two approaches in order to manage the occupational risk of exposure to incidental nanoparticles, raising the potential of combining both.
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.