ArticleEnvironmental health and toxicology2014
House-plant placement for indoor air purification and health benefits on asthmatics.
Article in Environmental health and toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of indoor plants on air quality: a systematic review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluating In Silico the Potential Health and Environmental Benefits of Houseplant Volatile Organic Compounds for an Emerging 'Indoor Forest Bathing' Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The Role of Indoor Plants in air Purification and Human Health in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Proposal for a Novel Line of Inquiry.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSome plants were placed in indoor locations frequented by asthmatics in order to evaluate the quality of indoor air and examine the health benefits to asthmatics.
methodsThe present study classified the participants into two groups: households of continuation and households of withdrawal by a quasi-experimental design. The households of continuation spent the two observation terms with indoor plants, whereas the households of withdrawal passed the former observation terms with indoor plants and went through the latter observation term without any indoor plants.
resultsThe household of continuation showed a continual decrease in the indoor concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during the entire observation period, but the household of withdrawal performed an increase in the indoor concentrations of VOCs, except formaldehyde and toluene during the latter observation term after the decrease during the former observation term. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) increased in the households of continuation with the value of 13.9 L/min in the morning and 20.6 L/ min in the evening, but decreased in the households of withdrawal with the value of -24.7 L/min in the morning and -30.2 L/min in the evening in the first experimental season. All of the households exhibited a decrease in the value of PEFR in the second experimental season.
conclusionsLimitations to the generalizability of findings regarding the presence of plants indoors can be seen as a more general expression of such a benefit of human-environment relations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.