ArticleMethodsX2024
A detailed methodology for estimating health-related hazards of workplace exposure to indoor formaldehyde vapours.
Article in MethodsX, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of lactic acid as a novel fixative for histological and neuroanatomical applications.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A comprehensive risk assessment method was applied to examine the risks associated with airborne formaldehyde occupational exposure among hospital laboratory staff. The method assessed exposure levels and health impacts by integrating area and personal air sampling, biological monitoring, and self-reported health data. Samples were collected from 74 workplaces across various departments using NIOSH method 3500 and were analyzed via UV-vis spectrophotometry. The data showed significant differences in exposure levels between departments (p≤0.05) and confirmed the efficacy of the method in identifying risk differences. Despite average personal exposure levels being measured lower than occupational limits, individual assessments indicated that some participants surpassed these limits, emphasizing the necessity of personal monitoring for workers with higher risks. The high prevalence of respiratory symptoms, such as cough and wheezing among staff, indicated the need for further investigation and targeted interventions. Although estimated cancer and non-cancer risks were within safe thresholds, the study emphasized the importance of continuous exposure monitoring and the implementation of effective control measures in hospital laboratory departments with formaldehyde emission. This integrated method improved the reliability and generalizability of formaldehyde exposure risk assessments and aided in the development of safe occupational health practices.•The method integrated personal and area sampling with advanced calibration for precise occupational exposure evaluation in laboratories.•The method used of biomarkers to assess formaldehyde absorption in the body estimating both cancerous and non-cancerous health risks associated with occupational exposure.•Addressed traditional method limitations and integrated risk components to improve data reliability for workplace safety and health risk management.
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.