ArticlePloS one2021
Comparison of samplers collecting airborne influenza viruses: 1. Primarily impingers and cyclones.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Viral cultures for assessing airborne infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- SARS-CoV-2 air sampling: A systematic review on the methodologies for detection and infectivity.Indoor air · 2022Pooled it
- Assessment of the role of handwash basins in the airborne transmission of multi-drug-resistant organisms in clinical and non-clinical settings.The Journal of hospital infection · 2026Article
- Detection of Aerosolized Protein Using a Condensation Growth Tube Coupled with an Electrochemical Immunoassay on Screen-Printed Carbon Electrodes.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- From air to insight: the evolution of airborne DNA sequencing technologies.Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of an electrostatic precipitator in mitigating the transmission of airborne viruses in experimentally infected pigs.Veterinary research · 2025Article
- Efficiency of the Coriolis µ Air Sampling Device for Fungal Contamination Analysis of Indoor Air: A Case Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Hybrid barn: the switch from a naturally to a mechanically ventilated turkey barn to protect from harmful bioaerosols.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Sampling efficiency and nucleic acid stability during long-term sampling with different bioaerosol samplers.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2024Article
- Bioaerosol Sampling Devices and Pretreatment for Bacterial Characterization: Theoretical Differences and a Field Experience in a Wastewater Treatment Plant.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Exploring the utility of bioaerosol metagenomics compared to PCRs for swine pathogen surveillance.Frontiers in microbiomes · 2024Article
- Real-time environmental surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 aerosols.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- How to Build Live-Cell Sensor Microdevices.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Aerosolize this: Generation, collection, and analysis of aerosolized virus in laboratory settings.PLoS pathogens · 2023Article
- Patterns of foot-and-mouth disease virus detection in environmental samples in an endemic setting.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Dispersion of SARS-CoV-2 RNA across a wastewater treatment plant and its workers.Water and environment journal : the journal · 2022Article
- Influenza viruses and coronaviruses: Knowns, unknowns, and common research challenges.PLoS pathogens · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Researchers must be able to measure concentrations, sizes, and infectivity of virus-containing particles in animal agriculture facilities to know how far infectious virus-containing particles may travel through air, where they may deposit in the human or animal respiratory tract, and the most effective ways to limit exposures to them. The objective of this study was to evaluate a variety of impinger and cyclone aerosol or bioaerosol samplers to determine approaches most suitable for detecting and measuring concentrations of virus-containing particles in air. Six impinger/cyclone air samplers, a filter-based sampler, and a cascade impactor were used in separate tests to collect artificially generated aerosols of MS2 bacteriophage and swine and avian influenza viruses. Quantification of infectious MS2 coliphage was carried out using a double agar layer procedure. The influenza viruses were titrated in cell cultures to determine quantities of infectious virus. Viral RNA was extracted and used for quantitative real time RT-PCR, to provide total virus concentrations for all three viruses. The amounts of virus recovered and the measured airborne virus concentrations were calculated and compared among the samplers. Not surprisingly, high flow rate samplers generally collected greater quantities of virus than low flow samplers. However, low flow rate samplers generally measured higher, and likely more accurate, airborne concentrations of Infectious virus and viral RNA than high flow samplers. To assess airborne viruses in the field, a two-sampler approach may work well. A suitable high flow sampler may provide low limits of detection to determine if any virus is present in the air. If virus is detected, a suitable lower flow sampler may measure airborne virus concentrations accurately.
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.