ArticleScientific reports2024
Exposure and risk assessment for agricultural workers during chlorothalonil and flubendiamide treatments in pepper fields.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pesticide exposure of operators during mixing and loading a drone: towards a stratified exposure assessment.Pest management science · 2026Article
- Advancing occupational and environmental safety in greenhouse agriculture: an extended elaboration likelihood model of safety technology adoption.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The effect of social media-based education on skin cancer risk knowledge, skin self-examination and sun protection behaviours of women working in agriculture.BMC public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Pesticides are indispensable tools in modern agriculture for enhancing crop productivity. However, the inherent toxicity of pesticides raises significant concerns regarding human exposure, particularly among agricultural workers. This study investigated the exposure and associated risks of two commonly used pesticides in open-field pepper cultivation, namely, chlorothalonil and flubendiamide, in the Republic of Korea. We used a comprehensive approach, encompassing dermal and inhalation exposure measurements in agricultural workers during two critical scenarios: mixing/loading and application. Results revealed that during mixing/loading, dermal exposure to chlorothalonil was 3.33 mg (0.0002% of the total active ingredient [a.i.]), while flubendiamide exposure amounted to 0.173 mg (0.0001% of the a.i.). Conversely, dermal exposure increased significantly during application to 648 mg (chlorothalonil) and 93.1 mg (flubendiamide), representing 0.037% and 0.065% of the total a.i., respectively. Inhalation exposure was also evident, with chlorothalonil and flubendiamide exposure levels varying across scenarios. Notably, the risk assessment using the Risk Index (RI) indicated acceptable risk of exposure during mixing/loading but raised concerns during application, where all RIs exceeded 1, signifying potential risk. We suggest implementing additional personal protective equipment (PPE) during pesticide application, such as gowns and lower-body PPE, to mitigate these risks.
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.