↓ Skip to main content

Safety assessment of nanomaterials using an advanced decision-making framework, the DF4nanoGrouping

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nanoparticle Research, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Safety assessment of nanomaterials using an advanced decision-making framework, the DF4nanoGrouping
Published in
Journal of Nanoparticle Research, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11051-017-3850-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Landsiedel, Lan Ma-Hock, Karin Wiench, Wendel Wohlleben, Ursula G. Sauer

Abstract

As presented at the 2016 TechConnect World Innovation Conference on 22-25 May 2016 in Washington DC, USA, the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) 'Nano Task Force' proposes a Decision-making framework for the grouping and testing of nanomaterials (DF4nanoGrouping) consisting of three tiers to assign nanomaterials to four main groups with possible further subgrouping to refine specific information needs. The DF4nanoGrouping covers all relevant aspects of a nanomaterial's life cycle and biological pathways: intrinsic material properties and system-dependent properties (that depend upon the nanomaterial's respective surroundings), biopersistence, uptake and biodistribution, and cellular and apical toxic effects. Use, release, and exposure route may be applied as 'qualifiers' to determine if, e.g., nanomaterials cannot be released from products, which may justify waiving of testing. The four main groups encompass (1) soluble, (2) biopersistent high aspect ratio, (3) passive, and (4) active nanomaterials. The DF4nanoGrouping foresees a stepwise evaluation of nanomaterial properties and effects with increasing biological complexity. In case studies covering carbonaceous nanomaterials, metal oxide, and metal sulfate nanomaterials, amorphous silica and organic pigments (all nanomaterials having primary particle sizes below 100 nm), the usefulness of the DF4nanoGrouping for nanomaterial hazard assessment was confirmed. The DF4nanoGrouping facilitates grouping and targeted testing of nanomaterials. It ensures that sufficient data for the risk assessment of a nanomaterial are available, and it fosters the use of non-animal methods. No studies are performed that do not provide crucial data. Thereby, the DF4nanoGrouping serves to save both animals and resources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 23%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 7 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 11%
Engineering 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 27 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,482,347
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanoparticle Research
#706
of 907 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,164
of 310,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanoparticle Research
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 907 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 310,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.