Cited by 27Microplastics and Plastic PollutionAir Quality and Health ImpactsPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet; none of the 34 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Exploring Personal Exposure to Airborne Microplastics across Various Work Environments in Pathum Thani Province, Thailand

Open access
Limsiriwong, Kanokwan, Winijkul, Ekbordin·2023·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract

This study used personal air samplers to assess the concentration of airborne microplastics exposed by different occupational groups during their working hours. The personal air sampler was placed in the “breathing zone” of the worker during working hours to collect microplastic exposure data. Occupations examined included housekeepers, laundromat staff, office workers, van drivers, street vendors, maintenance technicians in wastewater treatment plants, and waste segregation officers in the university and market. The level of airborne microplastic exposure was found to be influenced by the daily activities and environmental conditions of the workplace. Waste segregation officers in the university and market exhibited the highest levels of exposure to airborne microplastics, at 3964 ± 2575 microplastics per cubic meter (n/m3) and 3474 ± 678 n/m3, respectively. Further analysis focused on airborne microplastics less than 10 µm in size which can be taken in through inhalation. During the 8 h working period, the waste segregation officer in the university recorded the highest 10 µm airborne microplastic intake, at 5460 pieces, followed by the waste segregation officer in the market at 3301 pieces, housekeepers at 899 pieces, van drivers at 721 pieces, maintenance technicians in WWTPs at 668 pieces, laundromat staff at 454 pieces, street vendors at 249 pieces, and office workers at 131 pieces.

Checked 2026-11-12 · 2 references not checked yet

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study used personal air samplers to assess airborne microplastic exposure among eight occupational groups in Pathum Thani, Thailand, during working hours. Waste segregation officers had the highest exposure concentrations and estimated inhalation intake of microplastics <10 µm, while office workers had the lowest.

Key findings

  • Waste segregation officers at the university and market had the highest airborne microplastic concentrations, at 3964 ± 2575 n/m³ and 3474 ± 678 n/m³, respectively; office workers had the lowest at 192 ± 73 n/m³.
  • During the 8 h working period, estimated intake of microplastics <10 µm was highest for the university waste segregation officer (5460 pieces), followed by the market waste segregation officer (3301), housekeeper (899), van driver (721), WWTP maintenance technician (668), laundromat staff (454), street vendor (249), and office worker (131).
  • Fragment-shaped microplastics accounted for 96.2%–99.5% of total airborne microplastics, while fibers accounted for 0.5%–3.8%; microplastics sized 10–100 µm dominated exposure (50.2%–71.8%), followed by <10 µm (23.6%–47.8%).
  • The market waste segregation officer had the highest TSP exposure at 0.670 ± 0.319 mg/m³; all occupational TSP exposures complied with the OSHA 8 h permissible exposure limit of 15 mg/m³.

Methods

  • Personal air samplers were placed in workers’ breathing zones and operated at 2 L/min for 8 h following NIOSH0500; three samples were collected per occupational group during December 2022–February 2023 (dry season) across eight indoor and outdoor workplaces.
  • Filters were analyzed gravimetrically for TSP, stained with Nile Red, inspected by fluorescence microscopy for shape and size ranges (<10 µm, 10–100 µm, 100–1000 µm, >1000 µm), and selected samples were analyzed by ATR-FTIR for polymer type.
  • Pearson correlation in SPSS was used to assess relationships between airborne microplastic concentrations and TSP or meteorological parameters.

Limitations

  • Stated: environmental conditions were recorded only at the start of each sample collection, so more samples and environmental conditions are needed to investigate their effects on airborne microplastic concentrations.
  • Stated: ATR-FTIR has a minimum detectable plastic size of approximately 10 µm, with significantly reduced accuracy for samples <50 µm; light scattering also challenged classification of non-fiber shapes, so other shapes were categorized as fragments.
  • Evident from the text: only three samples were collected per occupational group, sampling was limited to one dry-season period, and the authors note that results could not be compared with prior studies because no prior research on airborne microplastic exposure was available.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/ijerph20247162

Cites

33 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 Sample groups in this study: (A) housekeeper; (B) laundromat staff; (C) office worker; (D) van driver; (E) street vendor; (F) maintenance technician in a WWTP; (G) waste segregation officer at the university; (H) waste segregation officer in the market.
Figure 1 Sample groups in this study: (A) housekeeper; (B) laundromat staff; (C) office worker; (D) van driver; (E) street vendor; (F) maintenance technician in a WWTP; (G) waste segregation officer at the university; (H) waste segregation officer in the market.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 (a) The personal air sampler; (b) component of the personal air sampler: (A) personal air sampling pump; (B) GF/A pad placed in cassette filter; (C) pump calibration equipment.
Figure 2 (a) The personal air sampler; (b) component of the personal air sampler: (A) personal air sampling pump; (B) GF/A pad placed in cassette filter; (C) pump calibration equipment.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Number concentration of AMPs in each occupational group (mean ± S.D.); (A) housekeeper, (B) laundromat staff, (C) Office worker, (D) van driver, (E) street vendor, (F) maintenance technician in the WWTP, (G) waste segregation officer in the university, (H) waste segregation officer in the market.
Figure 3 Number concentration of AMPs in each occupational group (mean ± S.D.); (A) housekeeper, (B) laundromat staff, (C) Office worker, (D) van driver, (E) street vendor, (F) maintenance technician in the WWTP, (G) waste segregation officer in the university, (H) waste segregation officer in the market.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Shapes of Nile-Red-stained AMPs inspected by fluorescence microscopy with a 11.5× objective lens. (A) Fiber; (B) fragment.
Figure 4 Shapes of Nile-Red-stained AMPs inspected by fluorescence microscopy with a 11.5× objective lens. (A) Fiber; (B) fragment.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Percentage of different AMP shapes in each occupational group.
Figure 5 Percentage of different AMP shapes in each occupational group.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Percent of AMPs in different size ranges in each occupational group.
Figure 6 Percent of AMPs in different size ranges in each occupational group.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Concentration of TSP in each occupational group (mean ± S.D.): (A) housekeeper, (B) laundromat staff, (C) office worker, (D) van driver, (E) street vendor, (F) maintenance technician in the WWTP, (G) waste segregation officer in the university, and (H) waste segregation officer in the market.
Figure 7 Concentration of TSP in each occupational group (mean ± S.D.): (A) housekeeper, (B) laundromat staff, (C) office worker, (D) van driver, (E) street vendor, (F) maintenance technician in the WWTP, (G) waste segregation officer in the university, and (H) waste segregation officer in the market.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Scatter plot of TSP concentration and AMP number concentration: (a) all samples; (b) indoor conditions; (c) outdoor conditions. Different color dots refer to different sample groups.
Figure 8 Scatter plot of TSP concentration and AMP number concentration: (a) all samples; (b) indoor conditions; (c) outdoor conditions. Different color dots refer to different sample groups.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 9 AMP intake (<10 µm) via the inhalation pathway during working hours.
Figure 9 AMP intake (<10 µm) via the inhalation pathway during working hours.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

35 Own result · 11 No full text of the sources · 9 Check pending · 6 Own interpretation · 3 Own method

Verify all 9 references — free account

Show all 39 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 15
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
25 of 25
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Environmental exposure to airborne microplastics has not been studied extensively, and there is limited research on the quantity of inhaled microplastics in the human body.

    “Environmental exposure to airborne microplastics has not been studied extensively, and there is limited research on the quantity of inhaled microplastics in the human body.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The personal air sampler placed in the breathing zone collects representative microplastic exposure data for the worker's working hours.

    “The sampling device and GF/A with micropore 1.6 µm (Figure 2) was set in the “breathing zone” of the worker.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The FTIR database match correctly identifies polymer types.

    “The polymer type was determined by identifying the polymer with the strongest match in the FTIR database.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The dry season sampling period is representative of typical exposure.

    “Additionally, all samples in this study were collected during the same period (dry season), during December 2022 and February 2023”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Microplastics <10 µm can escape the mucociliary clearance mechanisms of the lung and can be deposited in the respiratory system.

    “they can escape the mucociliary clearance mechanisms of the lung and can be deposited in the respiratory system.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Microplastics larger than 100 µm can be removed by self-cleaning mechanisms of the human body and deposition by Earth’s gravity.

    “they can be removed by self-cleaning mechanisms of the human body and deposition by Earth’s gravity.”
6 of 6

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Aung, H.H., Sivakumar, A., Gholami, S.K., Venkateswaran, S.P., and Gorain, B. (2019). Nanotechnology-Based Targeted Drug Delivery Systems for Lung Cancer, Academic Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Limsiriwong, K., & Winijkul, E.
Affiliations
Asian Institute of Technology (TH)
Corresponding author
Winijkul, Ekbordin
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-12-11
Volume
20
Issue
24
Pages
7162
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4389547646
Cited by
27
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7
FWCI
1.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Keywords
airborne microplastics, occupational exposure, personal air sampling, inhalation exposure, waste sorting, wastewater treatment plant maintenance, housekeepers, street vendors, office workers, Pathum Thani
MeSH terms
Microplastics, Working Conditions, Air Pollutants, Occupational, Environmental Monitoring, Humans, Plastics, Thailand, Occupational Exposure

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-12, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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