ArticleMethods and protocols2018
Environmental and Experimental Factors Affecting Efficacy Testing of Nonporous Plastic Antimicrobial Surfaces.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial nanomaterials in food packaging and preservation.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Environmental factors and antimicrobial efficacy: the impact of temperature and humidity on material surfaces.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- A realistic approach for evaluating antimicrobial surfaces for dry surface exposure scenarios.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of antibacterial activity and influencing factors of normal and nanostructured copper-based materials.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Review
- Antibacterial activity of solid surfaces is critically dependent on relative humidity, inoculum volume, and organic soiling.FEMS microbes · 2024Article
- Methods to assess antibacterial, antifungal and antiviral surfaces in relation to touch and droplet transfer: a review, gap-analysis and suggested approaches.Access microbiology · 2024Review
- Demonstrating the In Vitro and In Situ Antimicrobial Activity of Oxide Mineral Microspheres: An Innovative Technology to Be Incorporated into Porous and Nonporous Materials.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Preparation and Characterization of Photocatalytically Active Antibacterial Surfaces Covered with Acrylic Matrix Embedded Nano-ZnO and Nano-ZnO/Ag.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Antimicrobial Activity of a Novel Cu(NOMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- How Do We Determine the Efficacy of an Antibacterial Surface? A Review of Standardised Antibacterial Material Testing Methods.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Copper as an antimicrobial agent: recent advances.RSC advances · 2021Review
- Antibacterial activity testing methods for hydrophobic patterned surfaces.Scientific reports · 2021Article
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
Test methods for efficacy assessment of antimicrobial coatings are not modelled on a hospital environment, and instead use high humidity (>90%) high temperature (37 °C), and no airflow. Therefore, an inoculum will not dry, resulting in an antimicrobial surface exhibiting prolonged antimicrobial activity, as moisture is critical to activity. Liquids will dry quicker in a hospital ward, resulting in a reduced antimicrobial efficacy compared to the existing test, rendering the test results artificially favourable to the antimicrobial claim of the product. This study aimed to assess how hospital room environmental conditions can affect the drying time of an inoculum, and to use this data to inform test parameters for antimicrobial efficacy testing based on the hospital ward. The drying time of different droplet sizes, in a range of environmental conditions likely found in a hospital ward, were recorded (
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.