The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials
Abstract
The physical, chemical and biological properties of various nanomaterials differ substantially – as do the potential risks they pose. We argue that nanomaterials must be categorized based on the location of the nanoscale structure in the system/material before their hazards can be assessed and propose a categorization framework that enables scientists and regulators to identify the categories of nanomaterials systematically. The framework is applied to a suggested hazard identification approach aimed at identifying causality between inherent physical and chemical properties and observed adverse effects reported in the literature. We tested the workability of the proposed procedure using nanoparticles as an illustrative case study. A database was generated noting the reported inherent physical and chemical properties of the nanoparticles tested and the main effects observed. 428 studies were noted in the database reporting on a total of 965 nanoparticles. We found that although a limited number of studies have been reported on ecotoxicity, more than 120 and 270 have been reported on mammalian toxicity and cytotoxicity, respectively. In general there was a lack of characterization of the nanoparticles studied and it was not possible to link specific properties of nanoparticles to the observed effects. Our study shows that future research strategies must have a strong focus on characterization of the nanoparticles tested.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Physics of Block Copolymers
Hamley, I. W. (1998) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198502180.001.0001 · Cited by 1,913
Brunner, T. J., Wick, P., Manser, P., Spohn, P., Grass, R. N., Limbach, L. K., Bruinink, A., & Stark, W. J. (2006) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es052069i · Cited by 1,385
Cited by
Nanotechnology in the real world: Redeveloping the nanomaterial consumer products inventory
Vance, M. E., Kuiken, T., Vejerano, E. P., McGinnis, S. P., Hochella, M. F., Rejeski, D., & Hull, M. S. (2015) · Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology · doi:10.3762/bjnano.6.181 · Cited by 1,785
Mechanisms of genotoxicity. A review of in vitro and in vivo studies with engineered nanoparticles
Magdolenova, Z., Collins, A., Kumar, A., Dhawan, A., Stone, V., & Dusinska, M. (2014) · Nanotoxicology · doi:10.3109/17435390.2013.773464 · Cited by 616
Hazards and Risks of Engineered Nanoparticles for the Environment and Human Health
Hristozov, D., & Malsch, I. (2009) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su1041161 · Cited by 149
Money, E. S., Barton, L. E., Dawson, J., Reckhow, K. H., & Wiesner, M. R. (2014) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.12.100 · Cited by 30
How important is drinking water exposure for the risks of engineered nanoparticles to consumers?
Tiede, K., Hanssen, S. F., Westerhoff, P., Fern, G. J., Hankin, S. M., Aitken, R. J., Chaudhry, Q., & Boxall, A. B. A. (2015) · Nanotoxicology · doi:10.3109/17435390.2015.1022888 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Foss Hansen, S., Larsen, B. H., Olsen, S. I., & Baun, A.
- Venue
- Nanotoxicology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-250
- ISSN
- 1743-5390 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-5404
- OpenAlex
- W2050892569
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/17435390701727509
- The paper
- Foss Hansen, S., Larsen, B. H., Olsen, S. I., & Baun, A. (2007). Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390701727509
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.