Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Art and craft material use patterns by pre-school and elementary school children at home and school: a year long survey for refining exposure assessments

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 33, pages 994–1003 (2023)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Use frequency and times are critical parameters for estimating realistic chemical exposures associated with the use of consumer products. Very limited information is available in the published literature for children’s use patterns of art and craft materials at home and school.

Objective

Conduct a year-long survey of art materials use at home and school by pre-school and elementary school children, teachers, and parents which can be used to refine chemical exposure assessments for these consumer products.

Methods

Parent and teacher online surveys were conducted on the daily use of markers and monthly use of fifteen additional art and craft materials.

Results

Daily marker use by elementary children was widespread at home and school (65% and 80%, respectively). On average, pre-school and elementary students used markers for 27 min per day, more than double daily home use. Adults used markers for longer durations relative to their children/students with teachers reporting the highest average daily usage time. School use of general art materials exceeded home use for both age groups, with elementary children using art materials more frequently than their pre-school counterparts. Examples of how these data can be used to refine exposure estimates are provided.

Significance

Accurate art material usage data contributes to refined estimates of chemical exposure for these consumer products.

Impact Statement

  • A year-long online survey was conducted which measured daily frequency and duration use for markers and comparable monthly use of other art materials for pre-school and elementary school children, their parents and teachers. Such use information is critical for estimating chemical exposures associated with this class of consumer products.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Home and school art activity.
Fig. 2: Comparison of daily marker use and daily minutes of marker use.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Additional data can be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Zuskin E, Schacter EN, Mustajbegovic J, Pucarin-Cvetkovic, Lipozencic J. Occupational health hazards of artists. Acta Dermatovenerol Croat. 2007;15:166–77.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Grabo TN. Unknown toxic exposures: arts and crafts materials. J Am Assoc Occ Health Nurses. 1997;45:124–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lu PC. A health hazard assessment in school arts and crafts. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol. 1992;11:12–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Summary of principles for evaluating health risks in children associated with exposure to chemicals.: World Health Organization; 2011 [updated December 7, 2011. 1-50]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/summary-of-principles-for-evaluating-health-risks-in-children-associated-with-exposure-to-chemicals.

  5. Ahmad GR, Kumar S, Ahmad D, Shammas MA. Risk assessment to evaluate if crayons complying with the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 for Lead, also comply with California Proposition 65. Front Public Health. 2017;5:130.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Biesterbos JW, Dudzina T, Delmaar CJ, Bakker MI, Russel FG, von Goetz N, et al. Usage patterns of personal care products: important factors for exposure assessment. Food Chem Toxicol. 2013;55:8–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Steiling W, Bascompta M, Carthew P, Catalano G, Corea N, D’Haese A, et al. Principle considerations for the risk assessment of sprayed consumer products. Toxicol Lett. 2014;227:41–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Castorina R, Tysman M, Bradman A, Hoover S, Iyer S, Russell M, et al. Volatile organic compound emissions from markers used in preschools, schools, and homes. Int J Environ Anal Chem. 2016;96:1247–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mak SL, Lau HK, editors. A study on the toy safety assessment model. 2013 6th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering; 23-24. 2013.

  10. Health Canada, Industry guide to Health Canada’s safety requirements for children’s toys and related products, HealthCanada, Ottawa, ON, 2012 [Available from: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/consumer-product-safety/reports-publications/industry-professionals/industry-guide-safety-requirements-children-toys-related-products-summary.html.

  11. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook; National Center for Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/R-09/052f; Chapter 17.

  12. Lesinskiene S, Lesinskaite A, Sambaras R, Karaliene V. Survey of drawing and art activities of preschoolers: Attitudes and experiences of parents. Health Educ Care. 2018;3:1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Stopford W National Family Opinion (NFO) Survey- email to Arts and Creative Materials Institute, unpublished. 1996.

  14. Clarke PM, Fiebig DG, Gerdtham UG. Optimal recall length in survey design. J Health Econ. 2008;27:1275–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kjellsson G, Clarke P, Gerdtham UG. Forgetting to remember or remembering to forget: a study of the recall period length in health care survey questions. J Health Econ. 2014;35:34–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Revilla M, Ochoa C. Ideal and maximum length for a web survey. Int J Mark Res. 2017;59:557–65.

    Google Scholar 

  17. United States Census Bureau. National Population Totals and Components of Change: 2020-2021. Annual estimates of the residents population of the United States, regions, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. [Available from: https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-national-total.html#par-textimage-1810472256].

  18. United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational employment and wages, May 2020 (Elementary school teachers, except special education) 2020 [Available from: bls.gov/oes/current/oes252021.htm].

  19. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Child-specific exposure scenarios examples (final report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-14-217F,2014.

  20. Salonen H, Salthammer T, Morawska L. Human exposure to ozone in school and office indoor environments. Environ Int. 2018;119:503–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Dossier for ethanol. General population DNEL (Systemic-inhalation); General population DNEL (Acute-inhalation) [Available from: https://echa.europa.eu/brief-profile/-/briefprofile/100.000.526].

  22. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2022. Toxicological profile for acetone. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. (Appendix A, p A-3) [Available from: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp21.pdf].

  23. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2020. Toxicological profile for 2-Butanone. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. (Appendix A, p A-3) [Available from: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp29.pdf].

  24. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2003. Toxicological review of methyl ethyl ketone in support of summary information on the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). US EPA, Washington DC. September. p 83. [Available from: https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris/iris_documents/documents/toxreviews/0071tr.pdf].

  25. Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110–314 Stat. 122 Stat. 3016, U.S. (August 14, 2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research paper is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Woodhall Stopford. His commitment to the multidisciplinary study of art materials and their safe use has led to far reaching health and safety benefits for consumers.

Funding

This survey was funded by The Art and Creative Materials Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Duke University OEM Toxicology Program, Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, and Community Health, Durham, NC, 27710, USA

    Candace Prusiewicz, Paul G. James, Thomas Brock & Chester E. Rodriguez

  2. Princeton Research and Consulting Center, LLC, Lawrence, NJ, 08648, USA

    Leon Kaplan

Authors
  1. Candace Prusiewicz
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul G. James
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leon Kaplan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Brock
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chester E. Rodriguez
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the preparation of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chester E. Rodriguez.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prusiewicz, C., James, P.G., Kaplan, L. et al. Art and craft material use patterns by pre-school and elementary school children at home and school: a year long survey for refining exposure assessments. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 33, 994–1003 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-023-00523-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-023-00523-3

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links