The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing Inhaled Ultrafine versus Fine Zinc Oxide Particles in Healthy Adults: A Human Inhalation Study
Open accessAbstract
RATIONALE: Zinc oxide is a common, biologically active constituent of particulate air pollution as well as a workplace toxin. Ultrafine particles (< 0.1 microm diameter) are believed to be more potent than an equal mass of inhaled accumulation mode particles (0.1-1.0 microm diameter). OBJECTIVES: We compared exposure-response relationships for respiratory, hematologic, and cardiovascular endpoints between ultrafine and accumulation mode zinc oxide particles. METHODS: In a human inhalation study, 12 healthy adults inhaled 500 microg/m3 of ultrafine zinc oxide, the same mass of fine zinc oxide, and filtered air while at rest for 2 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preexposure and follow-up studies of symptoms, leukocyte surface markers, hemostasis, and cardiac electrophysiology were conducted to 24 hours post-exposure. Induced sputum was sampled 24 hours after exposure. No differences were detected between any of the three exposure conditions at this level of exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Freshly generated zinc oxide in the fine or ultrafine fractions inhaled by healthy subjects at rest at a concentration of 500 microg/m3 for 2 hours is below the threshold for acute systemic effects as detected by these endpoints.
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
Passage of inhaled particles into the blood circulation in humans
Nemmar, A., Hoet, P. H. M., Vanquickenborne, B., Dinsdale, D., Thomeer, M., Hoylaerts, M. F., Vanbilloen, H., Mortelmans, L., & Nemery, B. (2002) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/hc0402.104118 · Cited by 1,719
Cited by
Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel
Nel, A., Xia, T., Mädler, L., & Li, N. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1114397 · Cited by 9,324
Brook, R. D., Rajagopalan, S., Pope, C. A., Brook, J. R., Bhatnagar, A., Diez-Roux, A. V., Holguin, F., Hong, Y., Luepker, R. V., Mittleman, M. A., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3181dbece1 · Cited by 6,548
Grey Goo on the Skin? Nanotechnology, Cosmetic and Sunscreen Safety
Nohynek, G. J., Lademann, J., Ribaud, C., & Roberts, M. S. (2007) · Critical Reviews in Toxicology · doi:10.1080/10408440601177780 · Cited by 644
Huang, C.-C., Aronstam, R. S., Chen, D.-R., & Huang, Y.-W. (2010) · Toxicology in Vitro · doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2009.09.007 · Cited by 434
Toxicity of nano- and micro-sized ZnO particles in human lung epithelial cells
Lin, W., Xu, Y., Huang, C.-C., Ma, Y., Shannon, K. B., Chen, D.-R., & Huang, Y.-W. (2009) · Journal of Nanoparticle Research · doi:10.1007/s11051-008-9419-7 · Cited by 391
Metadata
- Authors
- Beckett, W. S., Chalupa, D. F., Pauly-Brown, A., Speers, D. M., Stewart, J. C., Frampton, M. W., Utell, M. J., Huang, L.-S., Cox, C., Zareba, W., & Oberdörster, G.
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-05-15
- Volume
- 171
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1129-1135
- ISSN
- 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-4970
- OpenAlex
- W2122430690
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Comparing Inhaled Ultrafine versus Fine Zinc Oxide Particles in Healthy Adults: A Human Inhalation Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.200406-837oc
- The paper
- Beckett, W. S., Chalupa, D. F., Pauly-Brown, A., Speers, D. M., Stewart, J. C., Frampton, M. W., Utell, M. J., Huang, L.-S., Cox, C., Zareba, W., & Oberdörster, G. (2005). Comparing Inhaled Ultrafine versus Fine Zinc Oxide Particles in Healthy Adults: A Human Inhalation Study. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200406-837oc
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.
