ReviewIndustrial health2019
Nanomaterials as a new opportunity for protecting workers from biological risk.
Review in Industrial health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanotechnology in COVID-19 prevention, diagnosis, and treatment: a comprehensive review.Discover nano · 2025Review
- The relevant information about the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using the five-question approach (when, where, what, why, and how) and its impact on the environment.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2023Review
- Nanomedicine for COVID-19: the role of nanotechnology in the treatment and diagnosis of COVID-19.Emergent materials · 2021Review
- How can nanotechnology help to combat COVID-19? Opportunities and urgent need.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) represent a frequent complication for hospitalized patients and more rarely for workers. In recent years, substantial scientific evidence has been reached regarding the role played by the inanimate surfaces, especially those touched in patient-care areas, in the transmission of nosocomial pathogens. Therefore, it is essential to find new collective protective measures to minimize microbial contamination in healthcare facilities, thereby preventing the spread of multi-drug resistant bacteria. We present an overview of the major nano-enabled AntiMicrobial Coatings (AMCs) which may be used as collective protective measures in healthcare setting, discussing also some aspects related to their effectiveness and safety. AMCs may be classified within three groups on base of their mechanism of action: surfaces releasing active compound, contact-killing surfaces and anti-adhesive surfaces. To date, little information is available on the effectiveness of AMCs to reduce the risk of HAIs since the most of studies do not reach conclusive results on their beneficial effects. Moreover, the lack of standard protocols for assessing antimicrobial efficacy and poor data about the interaction between AMCs and disinfectants prevent their placing on the market. Further studies are needed for assessing risks and benefits of AMCs as collective protective measures in healthcare setting.
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.