ReviewBiomedicines2023
A Dusty Road for Astronauts.
Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [Mechanisms and protective strategies for astronaut skin injury in deep space environments].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Stance and Gait Analysis of Apollo Astronauts on the Moon.Muscle & nerve · 2026Article
- Astroimmunology: the effects of spaceflight and its associated stressors on the immune system.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2026Review
- Microgravity- induced organ and system-level deconditioning: a network physiology perspective.Frontiers in network physiology · 2026Review
- A biological and ethical assessment of whether humans could or should reproduce in space.NPJ microgravity · 2025Review
- [Effects of lunar soil simulant and Earth soil on lung injury in mice].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Article
- Martian samples, hazards, and biosecurity: Between science and bioethics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- On the nose: nasal neurostimulation as a technology countermeasure for sinonasal congestion in astronauts.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Assessment of toxicity changes induced by exposure of human cells to lunar dust simulant.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Dry eye disease in astronauts: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The lunar dust problem was first formulated in 1969 with NASA's first successful mission to land a human being on the surface of the Moon. Subsequent Apollo missions failed to keep the dust at bay, so exposure to the dust was unavoidable. In 1972, Harrison Schmitt suffered a brief sneezing attack, red eyes, an itchy throat, and congested sinuses in response to lunar dust. Some additional Apollo astronauts also reported allergy-like symptoms after tracking dust into the lunar module. Immediately following the Apollo missions, research into the toxic effects of lunar dust on the respiratory system gained a lot of interest. Moreover, researchers believed other organ systems might be at risk, including the skin and cornea. Secondary effects could translocate to the cardiovascular system, the immune system, and the brain. With current intentions to return humans to the moon and establish a semi-permanent presence on or near the moon's surface, integrated, end-to-end dust mitigation strategies are needed to enable sustainable lunar presence and architecture. The characteristics and formation of Martian dust are different from lunar dust, but advances in the research of lunar dust toxicity, mitigation, and protection strategies can prove strategic for future operations on Mars.
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.