↓ Skip to main content

Risks from accidental exposures to engineered nanoparticles and neurological health effects: A critical review

Overview of attention for article published in Particle and Fibre Toxicology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Risks from accidental exposures to engineered nanoparticles and neurological health effects: A critical review
Published in
Particle and Fibre Toxicology, January 2010
DOI 10.1186/1743-8977-7-42
Pubmed ID
Authors

Myrtill Simkó, Mats-Olof Mattsson

Abstract

There are certain concerns regarding the safety for the environment and human health from the use of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) which leads to unintended exposures, as opposed to the use of ENPs for medical purposes. This review focuses on the unintended human exposure of ENPs. In particular, possible effects in the brain are discussed and an attempt to assess risks is performed.Animal experiments have shown that investigated ENPs (metallic nanoparticles, quantum dots, carbon nanotubes) can translocate to the brain from different entry points (skin, blood, respiratory pathways). After inhalation or instillation into parts of the respiratory tract a very small fraction of the inhaled or instilled ENPs reaches the blood and subsequently secondary organs, including the CNS, at a low translocation rate. Experimental in vivo and in vitro studies have shown that several types of ENPs can have various biological effects in the nervous system. Some of these effects could also imply that ENPs can cause hazards, both acutely and in the long term. The relevance of these data for risk assessment is far from clear. There are at present very few data on exposure of the general public to either acute high dose exposure or on chronic exposure to low levels of air-borne ENPs. It is furthermore unlikely that acute high dose exposures would occur. The risk from such exposures for damaging CNS effects is thus probably very low, irrespective of any biological hazard associated with ENPs.The situation is more complicated regarding chronic exposures, at low doses. The long term accumulation of ENPs can not be excluded. However, we do not have exposure data for the general public regarding ENPs. Although translocation to the brain via respiratory organs and the circulation appears to be very low, there remains a possibility that chronic exposures, and/or biopersistent ENPs, can influence processes within the brain that are triggering or aggravating pathological processes.In general, the present state of knowledge is unsatisfactory for a proper risk assessment in this area. Crucial deficits include lack of exposure data, the absence of a proper dose concept, and that studies often fail in adequate description of the investigated ENPs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 143 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 22%
Researcher 31 21%
Student > Master 16 11%
Other 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 18 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 11%
Engineering 14 9%
Environmental Science 13 9%
Chemistry 11 7%
Other 33 22%
Unknown 22 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#15,979,754
of 20,618,952 outputs
Outputs from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#366
of 529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,921
of 149,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,618,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 149,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them