ArticleMicrobiome2018
Filter forensics: microbiota recovery from residential HVAC filters.
Article in Microbiome, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Indoor Microbiome: Sampling, Analysis and Emerging Trends.Environmental microbiology reports · 2026Pooled it
- Air Bacterial Microbiomes in Hospitals: Case Studies from a Metropolis and a Small City of Thailand.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- Occupants and surface types drive microbial dynamics in controlled indoor environments.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- The indoors microbiome and human health.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2024Review
- An overview for monitoring and prediction of pathogenic microorganisms in the atmosphere.Fundamental research · 2024Review
- Article
- Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 RNA signal in a home with COVID-19 positive occupants.The Science of the total environment · 2021Article
- Challenges and Perspectives for Biosensing of Bioaerosol Containing Pathogenic Microorganisms.Micromachines · 2021Review
- Review
- Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) in intensive care unit.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Review
- Bacterial community analysis of floor dust and HEPA filters in air purifiers used in office rooms in ILAS, Beijing.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Bioaerosol Sampling: Classical Approaches, Advances, and Perspectives.Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2020Article
- Article
- Longitudinal homogenization of the microbiome between both occupants and the built environment in a cohort of United States Air Force Cadets.Microbiome · 2019Article
- Article
- Sampling Devices for Indoor Allergen Exposure: Pros and Cons.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEstablishing reliable methods for assessing the microbiome within the built environment is critical for understanding the impact of biological exposures on human health. High-throughput DNA sequencing of dust samples provides valuable insights into the microbiome present in human-occupied spaces. However, the effect that different sampling methods have on the microbial community recovered from dust samples is not well understood across sample types. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) filters hold promise as long-term, spatially integrated, high volume samplers to characterize the airborne microbiome in homes and other climate-controlled spaces. In this study, the effect that dust recovery method (i.e., cut and elution, swabbing, or vacuuming) has on the microbial community structure, membership, and repeatability inferred by Illumina sequencing was evaluated.
resultsThe results indicate that vacuum samples captured higher quantities of total, bacterial, and fungal DNA than swab or cut samples. Repeated swab and vacuum samples collected from the same filter were less variable than cut samples with respect to both quantitative DNA recovery and bacterial community structure. Vacuum samples captured substantially greater bacterial diversity than the other methods, whereas fungal diversity was similar across all three methods. Vacuum and swab samples of HVAC filter dust were repeatable and generally superior to cut samples. Nevertheless, the contribution of environmental and human sources to the bacterial and fungal communities recovered via each sampling method was generally consistent across the methods investigated.
conclusionsDust recovery methodologies have been shown to affect the recovery, repeatability, structure, and membership of microbial communities recovered from dust samples in the built environment. The results of this study are directly applicable to indoor microbiota studies utilizing the filter forensics approach. More broadly, this study provides a better understanding of the microbial community variability attributable to sampling methodology and helps inform interpretation of data collected from other types of dust samples collected from indoor environments.
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.