ReviewFrontiers in toxicology2025
Developing a feasible fast-track testing method for developmental neurotoxicity studies: alternative model for risk assessment of micro- and nanoplastics.
Review in Frontiers in toxicology, 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Micro- and nanoplastics (MNPs) are widespread environmental pollutants that pose significant health risks. They originate from industrial processes, consumer products, and environmental degradation, inducing oxidative stress through cellular dysfunctions such as membrane interaction, internalization, mitochondrial damage, inflammation, metal ion leaching, and impaired antioxidant defense. Despite increasing evidence of their toxicity-particularly developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) and mitochondrial impairment-our understanding remains limited due to the high costs of animal studies, which reduce the overall size of experimental data. This underscores the urgent need for alternative test methods that are cost-effective, rapid, and translational. This review examines new approach methodologies (NAMs) for DNT assessment, addressing the ethical, financial, and translational limitations of animal models. NAMs integrate three complementary non-animal models that enhance conventional testing. First, zebrafish models provide organismal insights into behavioral and neurodevelopmental outcomes at minimal cost. Second, neuronal organoids replicate human-specific neurodevelopmental processes in a 3D system, offering mechanistic insights. Lastly, human cell lines enable high-throughput screening, integrating findings from zebrafish and organoid studies. Establishing a new paradigm for DNT testing is crucial for faster and more efficient toxicity and risk assessments, ultimately protecting public health. Standardizing and gaining regulatory acceptance for NAMs will improve predictive accuracy and broaden their application in environmental toxicology. Advancing these methodologies is essential to addressing the risks of MNP exposure while promoting ethical and sustainable research practices.
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.