Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26346115›Full record

ArticleAerobiologia

Assessment of microbiological contamination in the work environments of museums, archives and libraries.

Justyna Skóra, Beata Gutarowska, Katarzyna Pielech-Przybylska, Łukasz Stępień, Katarzyna Pietrzak, Małgorzata Piotrowska, Piotr Pietrowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aerobiologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Mold in Paradise: A Review of Fungi Found in Libraries.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors.

Justyna SkóraInstitute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wólczańska St, 90-924 Lodz, Poland.
Beata GutarowskaInstitute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wólczańska St, 90-924 Lodz, Poland.
Katarzyna Pielech-PrzybylskaInstitute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wólczańska St, 90-924 Lodz, Poland.
Łukasz StępieńInstitute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, 34 Strzeszyńska St, 60-479 Poznan, Poland.
Katarzyna PietrzakInstitute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wólczańska St, 90-924 Lodz, Poland.
Małgorzata PiotrowskaInstitute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Lodz University of Technology, 171/173 Wólczańska St, 90-924 Lodz, Poland.
Piotr PietrowskiDepartment of Protective Equipment, Central Institute for Labour Protection - National Research Institute, 48 Wierzbowa St, 90-133 Lodz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Museums, archives and libraries have large working environments. The goal of this study was to determine microbial contamination in these work places and estimate the influence of microclimatic parameters and total dust content on microbial contamination. In addition, research included evaluation of ergosterol concentration and fungal bioaerosol particle size distribution. Numbers of micro-organisms in the air and on the surfaces in museums were higher (2.1 × 10

Indexed as

ArchiveBioaerosolErgosterolLibraryMicroclimatic parametersMicro-organisms at workplacesMuseum

Identifiers

PMID26346115
PMCPMC4556743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.