Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32701918›Full record

ArticleActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2020

COVID-19 and Living space challenge. Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe, and sustainable housing.

Daniela D'Alessandro, Marco Gola, Letizia Appolloni, Marco Dettori, Gaetano Maria Fara, Andrea Rebecchi, Gaetano Settimo, Stefano Capolongo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing 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

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mitigating indoor risk of airborne infections using COJournal of environmental health science & engineering · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Green Villages, the Pandemic, and the Future of California Urbanism.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Daniela D'AlessandroSapienza University of Rome, Department of Civil Building Environmental Engineering (DICEA). daniela.dalessandro@uniroma1.it.
Marco GolaPolytechnic University of Milan, Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (DABC). marco.gola@polimi.it.
Letizia AppolloniSapienza University of Rome, Department of Civil Building Environmental Engineering (DICEA). letizia.appolloni@uniroma1.it.
Marco DettoriUniversity of Sassari, Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences. madettori@uniss.it.
Gaetano Maria FaraSapienza University of Rome, Department of Public Health and Infectious diseases (DSPMI). gaetanomaria.fara@uniroma1.it.
Andrea RebecchiPolytechnic University of Milan, Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (DABC). andrea.rebecchi@polimi.it.
Gaetano SettimoNational Institute of Health, Rome. gaetano.settimo@iss.it.
Stefano CapolongoPolytechnic University of Milan, Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (DABC). stefano.capolongo@polimi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and aim of the workThe ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 is a strong reminder that the lockdown period has changed the way that people and communities live, work, and interact, and it's necessary to make resilient the built environment, both outdoor and mainly the indoor spaces: housing, workplaces, public buildings, and entertainment facilities. How can we re-design the concept of Well-being and Public Health in relation to the living places of the future?

methodsAccording to the previous statements and scenario, this paper aims to integrate the building hygiene and well-being, focusing the possible responses, both existing and for the new buildings, taking home a strong message from this "period" of physical distancing.

resultsThe Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe, and sustainable housing are framed into the following key points: 1. Visible and accessible green elements and spaces; 2. Flexibility, adaptability, sharing, and crowding of living spaces, and compliant functions located into the buildings; 3. Re-appropriation of the basic principles and archetypes of sustainable architecture, thermal comfort and Indoor Air Quality (IAQ); 4. Water consumption and Wastewater Management; 5. Urban Solid Waste Management; 6. Housing automation and electromagnetic fields; 7. Indoor building and finishing materials.

conclusionsThe Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe and sustainable housing may provide a useful basis for Designers, Policy Makers (fostering tax incentives for building renewal), Public Health experts and Local Health Agencies, in promoting actions and policies aimed to transform living places in healthier and Salutogenic spaces.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusPublic HealthAir Pollution, IndoorConstruction MaterialsCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Electromagnetic FieldsHousingHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Waste Management

Identifiers

PMID32701918
PMCPMC8023091

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.