ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Eye Safety of Light-Emitting Diodes in Toys: The Results of Three Years of Market Surveillance.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Between 2021 and 2023, the French market surveillance authority anonymously bought a sample of 50 toys containing a total of 103 individual LEDs from French retailers and had them tested by third-party laboratories accredited to perform tests in compliance with the international standard for electric toy safety IEC 62115, editions 2003 and 2017. Compliance with the harmonized EN IEC version of this standard is mandatory in the European Union under directive 2009/48/EC. The results revealed that 15 toys (30% of the tested toys) had at least one LED that did not comply with the eye safety requirements: 10 LEDs were non-compliant with respect to the retinal blue-light hazard, and 5 LEDs were non-compliant with respect to the retinal thermal hazard. A subsample of 10 toys with a total of 19 LEDs was assessed using the respective test methods corresponding to the 2003 and 2017 editions of the standard. The 2017 test method was found to be more permissive than the 2003 test method, a conclusion explained by the use of different risk assessment distances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.