ArticleToxics2023
Face Mask: As a Source or Protector of Human Exposure to Microplastics and Phthalate Plasticizers?
Article in Toxics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Risks of Prenatal and Early-Life Microplastics Exposure: A Comprehensive Review.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Phthalates Induced Neurotoxicity: A Mechanistic Approach.Central nervous system agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- Microplastic and human health with focus on pediatric well-being: a comprehensive review and call for future studies.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2025Article
- Airborne micro- and nanoplastics: emerging causes of respiratory diseases.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2024Review
- Simultaneous analysis of several plasticizer classes in different matrices by on-line turbulent flow chromatography-LC-MS/MS.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Material flow analysis-based assessment of polypropylene-fiber-containing microplastics released from disposable masks: Characterizing distribution in the environmental media.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wearing masks has become the norm during the Coronavirus disease pandemic. Masks can reportedly interface with air pollutants and release microplastics and plastic additives such as phthalates. In this study, an experimental device was set up to simulate the impact of five kinds of masks (activated-carbon, N95, surgical, cotton, and fashion masks) on the risk of humans inhaling microplastics and phthalates during wearing. The residual concentrations of seven major phthalates ranged from 296 to 72,049 ng/g (median: 1242 ng/g), with the lowest and the highest concentrations detected in surgical (median: 367 ng/g) and fashion masks (median: 37,386 ng/g), respectively. During the whole inhalation simulation process, fragmented and 20-100 μm microplastics accounted for the largest, with a rapid release during the first six hours. After one day's wearing, that of 6 h, while wearing different masks, 25-135 and 65-298 microplastics were inhaled indoors and outdoors, respectively. The total estimated daily intake of phthalates with indoor and outdoor conditions by inhalation and skin exposure ranged from 1.2 to 13 and 0.43 to 14 ng/kg bw/d, respectively. Overall, surgical masks yield a protective effect, while cotton and fashion masks increase human exposure to microplastics and phthalates both indoors and outdoors compared to no mask wearing. This study observed possible risks from common facemasks and provided suggestions to consumers for selecting suitable masks to reduce exposure risks from microplastics and phthalate acid.
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.