Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33914823›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Should homes and workplaces purchase portable air filters to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory infections? A systematic review.

Ashley Hammond, Tanzeela Khalid, Hannah V Thornton, Claire A Woodall, Alastair D Hay

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A critical review of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems within the context of a global SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.Process safety and environmental protection : transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part B · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ashley HammondCentre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6657-1514
Tanzeela KhalidCentre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Hannah V ThorntonCentre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Claire A WoodallCentre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7230-4105
Alastair D HayCentre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Respiratory infections, including SARS-CoV-2, are spread via inhalation or ingestion of airborne pathogens. Airborne transmission is difficult to control, particularly indoors. Manufacturers of high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters claim they remove almost all small particles including airborne bacteria and viruses. This study investigates whether modern portable, commercially available air filters reduce the incidence of respiratory infections and/or remove bacteria and viruses from indoor air. We systematically searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane for studies published between January 2000 and September 2020. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they included a portable, commercially available air filter in any indoor setting including care homes, schools or healthcare settings, investigating either associations with incidence of respiratory infections or removal and/or capture of aerosolised bacteria and viruses from the air within the filters. Dual data screening and extraction with narrative synthesis. No studies were found investigating the effects of air filters on the incidence of respiratory infections. Two studies investigated bacterial capture within filters and bacterial load in indoor air. One reported higher numbers of viable bacteria in the HEPA filter than in floor dust samples. The other reported HEPA filtration combined with ultraviolet light reduced bacterial load in the air by 41% (sampling time not reported). Neither paper investigated effects on viruses. There is an important absence of evidence regarding the effectiveness of a potentially cost-efficient intervention for indoor transmission of respiratory infections, including SARS-CoV-2. Two studies provide 'proof of principle' that air filters can capture airborne bacteria in an indoor setting. Randomised controlled trials are urgently needed to investigate effects of portable HEPA filters on incidence of respiratory infections.

Indexed as

Air FiltersAir Pollution, IndoorBacteriaCommunicable Disease ControlCOVID-19HousingHumansRespiratory Tract InfectionsSARS-CoV-2VirusesWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID33914823
PMCPMC8084223
OpenAlexW3159209398

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.