ReviewJournal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology2021
Potential of pulsed light technology for control of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital environments.
Review in Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultraviolet-C Photoresponsivity Using Fabricated TiOSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pulsed-Xenon Ultraviolet Light Highly Inactivates Human Coronaviruses on Solid Surfaces, Particularly SARS-CoV-2.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Inactivating SARS-CoV-2 Surrogates on Surfaces Using Engineered Water Nanostructures Incorporated with Nature Derived Antimicrobials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- UVC radiation intensity dependence of pathogen decontamination rate: semiclassical theory and experiment.European physical journal plus · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and its potential transmission through touching surfaces in clinical environments have impelled the use of conventional and novel methods of disinfection to prevent its spreading. Among the latter, pulsed light may be an effective, non-chemical decontamination alternative. Pulsed light technology inactivates microorganisms and viruses by using high intensity polychromatic light pulses, which degrades nucleic acids and proteins. This review describes this technology, compiles and critically analyzes the evidence about the virucidal efficacy of pulsed light technology with view on its potential use against SARS-CoV-2 in touching surfaces in health-care facilities. The efficacy of pulsed light proved against many different kind of viruses allows to conclude that is a suitable candidate to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 as long as the required fluence is applied and the appropriated exposure to contaminated surfaces is guaranteed.
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.