Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 16

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF OCCUPATIONAL AIRBORNE ASBESTOS TEXTILE FIBRES AS DETERMINED BY TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY

·1984·The Annals of Occupational Hygiene

Abstract

The size distributions of airborne chrysotile fibres, associated with the processes of carding, spinning and weaving in an asbestos textile factory, have been evaluated by transmission electron microscopy. The distributions were approximately log-normal, with little change between processes. Median lengths and diameters were 1.6 and 0.08 μm, respectively. The results indicate that about 60% of fibres would not be seen by scanning electron microscopy, under the usual conditions, and an even larger proportion would be missed by optical microscopy. For fibres longer than 5 μm, then, about 70% of fibres would be seen by the scanning electron microscope. An optical microscope with a resolution of 0.3 μm would see approximately one quarter of all fibres greater than this length.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/annhyg/28.3.333

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

See all 16

Metadata

Venue
The Annals of Occupational Hygiene
Published
1984-08-01
ISSN
1475-3162
Cited by
16
References
0
Language
en

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: SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF OCCUPATIONAL AIRBORNE ASBESTOS TEXTILE FIBRES AS DETERMINED BY TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/annhyg/28.3.333
The paper
SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF OCCUPATIONAL AIRBORNE ASBESTOS TEXTILE FIBRES AS DETERMINED BY TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY. (1984). The Annals of Occupational Hygiene. https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/28.3.333

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.