ArticleJournal of environmental health science & engineering2020
Size distribution of microbial aerosols in overground and subterranean treatment chambers at health resorts.
Article in Journal of environmental health science & engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Airborne Halophilic and Non-Halophilic Microbial Communities in an Underground Salt Mine Affected by Seasonal Environmental Fluctuations.Environmental microbiology reports · 2026Article
- Advances in Electrostatic Plasma Methods for Purification of Airborne Pathogenic Microbial Aerosols: Mechanism, Modeling and Application.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Review
- Comparison of Culture-Dependent and Culture-Independent Methods for Routine Identification of Airborne Microorganisms in Speleotherapeutic Caves.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Seasonal variation of aerosol fungal community structure in reed constructed wetlands.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Halophilic ArchaeaFrontiers in immunology · 2022Article
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
purposeto perform comparative analyzes of the size distributions of bacteria and fungi in the air of overground therapy chambers in Szczawnica sanatorium and subterranean inhalation chambers in Bochnia Salt Mine health resort taking into account influence of the season and presence of pathogenic species.
methodsbioaerosol samples were collected using 6-stage Andersen impactor. Bacterial and fungal aerosol concentrations and size distributions were calculated and isolated microorganisms were taxonomically identified based on their morphological, biochemical, and molecular features. Results: in both treatment rooms and atmospheric (outdoor) air, the acceptable microbial pollution levels were periodically exceeded. The size distribution analyzes revealed that in the case of bacteria - emission from the patients and in the case of fungi - transport with atmospheric (outdoor) air were the major processes responsible for microbiological contamination of indoor premises. The majority of microbial particulates were present in the air of studied premises as single bacterial vegetative cells, spores and fungal conidia or (most commonly) formed small microbial or microbial-dust aggregates. This phenomenon may have a significant effect on patients' actual exposure (especially on those treated for respiratory diseases) in terms of the dose of inhaled particles.
conclusionsthe microbiological quality of the air in sanatoriums and health resorts is a key factor for their therapeutic and prophylactic functions. When microbial pollution crossed the acceptable level, the measures that enable reducing undesirable contamination should be introduced, especially if large groups of patients undergo such therapy.
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.