Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22460981›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2012

Detection of infectious influenza virus in cough aerosols generated in a simulated patient examination room.

John D Noti, William G Lindsley, Francoise M Blachere, Gang Cao, Michael L Kashon, Robert E Thewlis, Cynthia M McMillen, William P King, Jonathan V Szalajda, Donald H Beezhold

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 176 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Airborne transmission and precautions: facts and myths.The Journal of hospital infection · 2015
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Concentrating viable airborne pathogens using a virtual impactor with a compact water-based condensation air sampler.Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2024
    Article
  17. Effect of Surgical Masks and N95 Respirators on Anxiety.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

John D NotiHealth Effects Laboratory Division (HELD), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Morgantown, WV, USA. ivr2@cdc.gov
William G Lindsley
Francoise M Blachere
Gang Cao
Michael L Kashon
Robert E Thewlis
Cynthia M McMillen
William P King
Jonathan V Szalajda
Donald H Beezhold
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USHarbin Institute of Technology · CN

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe potential for aerosol transmission of infectious influenza virus (ie, in healthcare facilities) is controversial. We constructed a simulated patient examination room that contained coughing and breathing manikins to determine whether coughed influenza was infectious and assessed the effectiveness of an N95 respirator and surgical mask in blocking transmission.

methodsNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health aerosol samplers collected size-fractionated aerosols for 60 minutes at the mouth of the breathing manikin, beside the mouth, and at 3 other locations in the room. Total recovered virus was quantitated by quantitative polymerase chain reaction and infectivity was determined by the viral plaque assay and an enhanced infectivity assay.

resultsInfectious influenza was recovered in all aerosol fractions (5.0% in >4 μm aerodynamic diameter, 75.5% in 1-4 μm, and 19.5% in <1 μm; n = 5). Tightly sealing a mask to the face blocked entry of 94.5% of total virus and 94.8% of infectious virus (n = 3). A tightly sealed respirator blocked 99.8% of total virus and 99.6% of infectious virus (n = 3). A poorly fitted respirator blocked 64.5% of total virus and 66.5% of infectious virus (n = 3). A mask documented to be loosely fitting by a PortaCount fit tester, to simulate how masks are worn by healthcare workers, blocked entry of 68.5% of total virus and 56.6% of infectious virus (n = 2).

conclusionsThese results support a role for aerosol transmission and represent the first reported laboratory study of the efficacy of masks and respirators in blocking inhalation of influenza in aerosols. The results indicate that a poorly fitted respirator performs no better than a loosely fitting mask.

Indexed as

AerosolsAir MicrobiologyCoughDisease Transmission, InfectiousHumansInfluenza, HumanMasksOrthomyxoviridaeReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionViral LoadViral Plaque AssayAerosols

Identifiers

PMID22460981
PMCPMC4680957
OpenAlexW2133842815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.