Current knowledge and available equipment are not sufficient for quantitative risk assessment of nanomaterials. Therefore, to assess the risks of activities involved with these materials, many qualitative methods have been introduced. Control banding-based methods are the most popular and widely used methods that have been evaluated and modified many times. Therefore, this study examines the use of these methods by Iranian researchers in comparison with other researchers from all over the world.Search for eligible papers was conducted on Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and SID databases with "Control banding," "Control banding methods," "Risk assessment," "Risk management," "Nanomaterials," and "Nanoparticles" keywords. After identifying the main papers, "Related articles" and "citations" options in Google Scholar and ResearchGate were used to identify additional studies.Forty-eight articles have been reviewed which 7 of them were conducted in Iran. Comparison of Iranian studies with foreign studies showed the following: foreign studies have used all CB-based methods, more or less; but Iranian studies used only the NanoTool method and in two cases the guidance method, In many foreign studies, quantitative methods were used along with qualitative methods, while in Iran, only these qualitative methods were used. In Iranian studies, these methods were used only to assess the risk of engineered nanomaterials, while in some foreign studies, the risk of incidental nanomaterials was also investigated.Iran is one of the leading countries in the field of nanotechnology. So, this level of familiarity and use of risk assessment methods for activities involved with nanomaterials is absolutely not enough. Therefore, it is recommended that appropriate measures be taken to familiarize companies and academic centers with nanomaterial risk assessment methods.
