Observational studyMedicine2020
A comparative study of four Bowie-Dick test under the condition of pressure steam sterilizer simulating gas leakage.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to understand the evaluation of different Bowie-Dick test (B-D test) on the performance of pressure steam sterilization equipment in the case of simulated gas leakage, and we selected a pulsating vacuum steam sterilizer to set 4 different gas leakage levels: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.7 mbar/min during the B-D test phase. In terms of methods, 4 different brands of B-D test kits (devices) were tested at 4 different leakage rates, and a total of 48 experiments were conducted. The results from univariate analysis revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the judgment of test results among different personnel and brands. The results from multivariate logistic regression analysis displayed that the difference between different personnel was statistically significant (χ = 45.34, P < .001); the difference between different products was statistically significant (χ = 129.37, P < .001); and there was no statistically significant difference between different degree of leakage (χ = 6.99, P > .05). Result judgments of brand 1 and brand 2 are susceptible to subjective factors. The judgment of brand 3 is intuitive and consistent with the evaluation result of brand 4. In conclusion, the order of capacity to evaluate air leakage from best to worst is brand 4→brand 3→brand 1→brand 2.
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.