Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23040490›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of infection control2013

Lifting the lid on toilet plume aerosol: a literature review with suggestions for future research.

David L Johnson, Kenneth R Mead, Robert A Lynch, Deborah V L Hirst

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of infection control, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-1 -producingInfection prevention in practice · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

David L JohnsonDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Oklahoma College of Public Health, Oklahoma City, OK 73126-0901, USA. David-Johnson@ouhsc.edu
Kenneth R Mead
Robert A Lynch
Deborah V L Hirst

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe potential risks associated with "toilet plume" aerosols produced by flush toilets is a subject of continuing study. This review examines the evidence regarding toilet plume bioaerosol generation and infectious disease transmission.

methodsThe peer-reviewed scientific literature was searched to identify articles related to aerosol production during toilet flushing, as well as epidemiologic studies examining the potential role of toilets in infectious disease outbreaks.

resultsThe studies demonstrate that potentially infectious aerosols may be produced in substantial quantities during flushing. Aerosolization can continue through multiple flushes to expose subsequent toilet users. Some of the aerosols desiccate to become droplet nuclei and remain adrift in the air currents. However, no studies have yet clearly demonstrated or refuted toilet plume-related disease transmission, and the significance of the risk remains largely uncharacterized.

conclusionResearch suggests that toilet plume could play a contributory role in the transmission of infectious diseases. Additional research in multiple areas is warranted to assess the risks posed by toilet plume, especially within health care facilities.

Indexed as

AerosolsAir MicrobiologyDisease Transmission, InfectiousToilet FacilitiesHumansRisk AssessmentAerosols

Identifiers

PMID23040490
PMCPMC4692156

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.