Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35392279›Full record

ArticleAerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research2019

Evaluation of total and inhalable samplers for the collection of carbon nanotube and carbon nanofiber aerosols.

Matthew M Dahm, Douglas E Evans, Stephen Bertke, Sergey A Grinshpun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Matthew M DahmDivision of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA.
Douglas E EvansDivision of Applied Research and Technology, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1090 Tusculum Ave, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA.
Stephen BertkeDivision of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA.
Sergey A GrinshpunDepartment of Environmental Health, University of Cincinnati, 160 Panzeca Way, Cincinnati, OH 45267, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing number of carbon nanotubes and nanofibers (CNT/F) exposure and epidemiologic studies have utilized 25-mm and 37-mm open-faced cassettes (OFC) to assess the inhalable aerosol fraction. It has been previously established that the 37-mm OFC under-samples particles greater than 20 μm in diameter, but the size-selective characteristics of the 25-mm OFC have not yet been fully evaluated. This article describes an experimental study conducted to determine if the 25- and 37-mm OFCs performed with relative equivalence to a reference inhalable aerosol sampler when challenged with CNT/F particles. Side-by-side paired samples were collected within a small Venturi chamber using a 25-mm styrene OFC, 37-mm styrene OFC, 25-mm aluminum OFC, and Button Inhalable Aerosol Sampler. Three types of CNT/F materials and an Arizona road dust were used as challenge aerosols for the various sampler configurations. Repeated experiments were conducted for each sampler configuration and material. The OFC samplers operated at flow rates of 2 and 5 liters per minute. Results showed that the 25-mm OFC performed comparably to the Button Sampler when challenged with CNT/F aerosols, which was demonstrated in five of the six experimental scenarios with an average error of 20%. Overall, the results of this study indicate that the sampling efficiency of the 25- and 37-mm OFCs adequately followed the ISO/ACGIH/CEN inhalable sampling convention when challenged with CNT/F aerosols. Past exposure and epidemiologic studies that used these OFC samplers can directly compare their results to studies that have used other validated inhalable aerosol samplers.

Indexed as

carbon nanofiberscarbon nanotubesnanomaterial

Identifiers

PMID35392279
PMCPMC8985588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.