ReviewDisaster medicine and public health preparedness2020
Evidence Review and Practice Recommendation on the Material, Design, and Maintenance of Cloth Masks.
Review in Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Community Knowledge About the Use, Reuse, Disinfection and Disposal of Masks and Filtering Facepiece Respirators: Results of a Study Conducted in a Dermatology Clinic at the University of Naples in Italy.Journal of community health · 2021Article
- COVID-19 false dichotomies and a comprehensive review of the evidence regarding public health, COVID-19 symptomatology, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mask wearing, and reinfection.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite numerous masking recommendations from public health agencies, including the World Health Organization, editorials, and commentaries providing support for this notion, none had examined different homemade masks or demonstrated that perhaps not all cloth masks are the same. This article aims to provide evidence-based recommendations on cloth-mask materials, its design, and, importantly, its maintenance. Articles were obtained from PubMed and preprint servers up to June 10, 2020. Current evidence suggests that filtration effectiveness can range from 3% to 95%. Multiple layer (hybrid) homemade masks made from a combination of high density 100% cotton and materials with electrostatic charge would be more effective than one made from a single material. Mask fit greatly affects filtration efficiency, and adding an overhead knot or nylon overlay potentially provides the best fit for cloth masks. There is a paucity of evidence for masks maintenance as most studies are in the laboratory setting; however, switching every 4 hours as in medical masks and stored in dedicated containers while awaiting disinfection is recommended. Outside of these recommendations to improve the effectiveness of cloth masks to reduce infection transmission, there is a need for countries to set up independent testing labs for homemade masks made based on locally available materials. This can use existing occupational health laboratories usually used for accrediting masks and respirators.
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.