ReviewToxics2023
The Measurement of Atmospheric Black Carbon: A Review.
Review in Toxics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing black carbon sources with aethalometer data and ambient ΔBC/ΔCO ratios analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Components of particulate matter as potential risk factors for acute myocardial infarction.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Black carbon emissions generally underestimated in the global south as revealed by globally distributed measurements.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Environmental Xenobiotics and Epigenetic Modifications: Implications for Human Health and Disease.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Black Carbon (BC), the second-largest contributor to global warming, has detrimental effects on human health and the environment. However, the accurate quantification of BC poses a significant challenge, impeding the comprehensive assessment of its impacts. Therefore, this paper aims to critically review three quantitative methods for measuring BC: Thermal Optical Analysis (TOA), the Optical Method, and Laser-Induced Incandescence (LII). The determination principles, available commercial instruments, sources of deviation, and correction approaches associated with these techniques are systematically discussed. By synthesizing and comparing the quantitative results reported in previous studies, this paper aims to elucidate the underlying relationships and fundamental disparities among Elemental Carbon (EC), Equivalent Black Carbon (eBC), and Refractory Black Carbon (rBC). Finally, based on the current advancements in BC quantification, recommendations are proposed to guide future research directions.
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.