ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2026
Characterization of woodsmoke generated in the air pollution exposure lab and comparison to diesel exhaust.
Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To address the increasing concern regarding woodsmoke (WS) exposure and better understand its effects on human health, a WS generation system was built in the Air Pollution Exposure Laboratory to facilitate future controlled human exposure studies. Ground lodgepole pine was burned to generate WS, with PM2.5 concentrations of approximately 500 µg/m3 obtained. The WS produced by this system was characterized and directly compared with diesel exhaust (DE) generated and collected at the same facility. For gases, WS showed slight increases in CO and CO2 compared with filtered air (FA), whereas DE had significantly higher levels of NOx, CO, CO2, and total volatile organic compounds than FA. The non-refractory composition of WS aerosols was approximately 98% organics, 0.2% ammonium, 1.3% nitrate, and 0.2% sulfate. Among the organic species, the fraction of oxygenated species was much higher in WS aerosols than in DE aerosols. Moreover, WS aerosols had higher concentrations of Cd compared with DE aerosols. Greater oxidative potential was also observed for WS compared with DE, with dithiothreitol consumption rates of 0.0090 nmol/min/µg. This study established a controlled human exposure platform for WS and described the methods used for analyzing and comparing the concentrations, particulate morphologies, chemical compositions, and oxidative potentials of different lab-generated pollutants. The observed differences between WS and DE in oxidative potential and amounts of gases, organic species, and metals provide a foundation for investigating how specific air pollution components differentially impact human health.
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.