Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33507951›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Comparison of samplers collecting airborne influenza viruses: 1. Primarily impingers and cyclones.

Peter C Raynor, Adepeju Adesina, Hamada A Aboubakr, My Yang, Montserrat Torremorell, Sagar M Goyal

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. How to Build Live-Cell Sensor Microdevices.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter C RaynorDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6535-9274
Adepeju AdesinaDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Hamada A AboubakrUniversity of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Population Medicine Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8233-2353
My YangUniversity of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Population Medicine Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States of America.
Montserrat TorremorellUniversity of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Population Medicine Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States of America.
Sagar M GoyalUniversity of Minnesota, College of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Population Medicine Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7781-3080
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health CenterU54OH010170 · OH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BENDER, JEFFREY B. · 2011 to 2025
$24.2M
NIOSH CDC HHS U54 OH010170
6 · The paper itself

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

Air MicrobiologyAerosolsAgricultureAnimalsEnvironmental MonitoringOrthomyxoviridaeParticle SizeRNA, ViralAerosolsRNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID33507951
PMCPMC7842955
OpenAlexW3125163614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.