ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental hygiene2026
Evaluating occupational exposures to the graphene family of nanomaterials: Implications for worker safety and health.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2026. 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.
- Dustiness of graphene and graphite.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Graphene, a two-dimensional carbon-based nanomaterial, has garnered significant attention due to its exceptional physical and chemical properties, leading to its widespread application in various industries. However, the increasing utilization of this class of materials, also referred to as the graphene family of nanomaterials (GFNs), raises potential concerns regarding occupational exposures and health risks for workers. This study aimed to evaluate occupational exposures to GFNs across 11 primary and secondary manufacturing facilities operating in the U.S. A total of 44 workers participated in the study, with paired personal air samples collected for elemental carbon (EC) analysis at both the respirable and inhalable aerosol size fractions. The results revealed exposures with respirable EC concentrations ranging from <0.01 to 1825.23 µg/m³ with a geometric mean (GM) of 2.01 µg/m³ and inhalable concentrations from 0.01 to 6327.10 µg/m³ with a GM of 12.63 µg/m³. Notably, 38% of respirable samples exceeded a suggested occupational exposure band (OEB) of <10 µg/m³ established from a recent publication for GFNs, while 53% of inhalable samples exceeded the OEB. Primary manufacturing facilities that produce GFNs generally exhibited higher inhalable exposure levels compared to secondary manufacturers, likely due to the handling of larger quantities of dry powdered materials. Additionally, the use of engineering controls and personal protective equipment varied widely among facilities, impacting exposure levels. This study represents a crucial step in understanding any potential occupational risks associated with U.S. GFN exposures.
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.