Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32275273›Full record

ReviewActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2020

Passive air sampling: the use of the index of microbial air contamination.

Isabella Viani, Maria Eugenia Colucci, Massimiliano Pergreffi, Deanna Rossi, Licia Veronesi, Assunta Bizzarro, Emanuela Capobianco, Paola Affanni, Roberta Zoni, Elisa Saccani and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. TiOMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Study on the Effectiveness of a Copper Electrostatic Filtration System "Aerok 1.0" for Air Disinfection.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors.

Isabella VianiArray. isabella.viani@unipr.it.
Maria Eugenia ColucciUniversity of Parma. mariaeugenia.colucci@unipr.it.
Massimiliano PergreffiUniversity of Parma. massimiliano.pergreffi@gmail.com.
Deanna RossiUniversity of Parma. deannarossi1986@gmail.com.
Licia VeronesiUniversity of Parma. licia.veronesi@unipr.it.
Assunta BizzarroUniversity of Parma. abizzarro90@gmail.com.
Emanuela CapobiancoUniversity of Parma. emanuela.capobianco@unipr.it.
Paola AffanniUniversity of Parma. paola.affanni@unipr.it.
Roberta ZoniUniversity of Parma. roberta.zoni@unipr.it.
Elisa SaccaniUniversity of Parma. elisa.saccani@unipr.it.
Roberto AlbertiniUniversity of Parma. roberto.albertini@unipr.it.
Cesira PasquarellaUniversity of Parma. ira.pasquarella@unipr.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBioaerosol plays an important role in human life with potentially infectious, allergic and toxic effects. Active and passive methods can be used to assess microbial air contamination, but so far there is not a unanimous consensus regarding the indications about methods to be used and how to interpret the results. The passive method has been standardized by the Index of Microbial Air contamination (IMA). Classes of contamination and maximum acceptable levels of IMA have been proposed, related to different infection or contamination risks. The aim of this study was to provide information about the use of the passive sampling method, with reference to the IMA standard.

methodsWe searched PubMed and Scopus for articles published until January 2020 reporting the citation of the article by Pasquarella et al. "The index of microbial air contamination. J Hosp Infect 2000". Only studies in English language where the IMA standard was applied were considered. Studies regarding healthcare settings were excluded.

results27 studies were analyzed; 12 were performed in Europe, 8 in Asia, 5 in Africa, 2 in America. Cultural heritage sites, educational buildings and food industries were the most common indoor monitored environments; in 8 studies outdoor air was monitored.

conclusionsThis review has provided a picture of the application of standard IMA in different geographic areas and different environments at risk of airborne infection/contamination. The analysis of the results obtained, together with a wider collection of data, will provide a useful contribution towards the definition of reference limits for the various types of environments to implement targeted preventive measures.

Indexed as

Air MicrobiologyEnvironmental Monitoring

Identifiers

PMID32275273
PMCPMC7975895

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.