Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34456454›Full record

ArticleBuilding and environment2021

Estimating the impact of indoor relative humidity on SARS-CoV-2 airborne transmission risk using a new modification of the Wells-Riley model.

Amar Aganovic, Yang Bi, Guangyu Cao, Finn Drangsholt, Jarek Kurnitski, Pawel Wargocki

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Building and environment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Occupational exposure monitoring of airborne respiratory viruses in outpatient medical clinics.Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Air Change Rate and SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Hospitals and Residences: A Meta-Analysis.Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Amar AganovicDepartment of Automation and Process Engineering, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Yang BiDepartment of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology - NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
Guangyu CaoDepartment of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology - NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
Finn DrangsholtDepartment of Automation and Process Engineering, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Jarek KurnitskiREHVA Technology and Research Committee, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia.
Pawel WargockiDepartment of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NOUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NOTallinn University of Technology · EETechnical University of Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A novel modified version of the Wells-Riley model was used to estimate the impact of relative humidity (RH) on the removal of respiratory droplets containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus by deposition through gravitational settling and its inactivation by biological decay; the effect of RH on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 was not considered. These effects were compared with the removal achieved by increased ventilation rate with outdoor air. Modeling was performed assuming that the infected person talked continuously for 60 and 120 min. The results of modeling showed that the relative impact of RH on the infection risk depended on the ventilation rate and the size range of virus-laden droplets. A ventilation rate of 0.5 ACH, the change of RH between 20% and 53% was predicted to have a small effect on the infection risk, while at a ventilation rate of 6 ACH this change had nearly no effect. On the contrary, increasing the ventilation rate from 0.5 ACH to 6 ACH was predicted to decrease the infection risk by half which is remarkably larger effect compared with that predicted for RH. It is thus concluded that increasing the ventilation rate is more beneficial for reducing the airborne levels of SARS-CoV-2 than changing indoor RH. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The present results show that humidification to moderate levels of 40%-60% RH should not be expected to provide a significant reduction in infection risk caused by SARS-CoV-2, hence installing and running humidifiers may not be an efficient solution to reduce the risk of COVID-19 disease in indoor spaces. The results do however confirm that ventilation has a key role in controlling SARS-CoV-2 virus concentration in the air providing considerably higher benefits. The modified model developed in the present work can be used by public health experts, engineers, and epidemiologists when selecting different measures to reduce the infection risk from SARS-CoV-2 indoors allowing informed decisions concerning indoor environmental control.

Indexed as

Indoor environmentRelative humiditySARS-CoV-2VentilationVirus airborne transmission

Identifiers

PMID34456454
PMCPMC8380559
OpenAlexW3193670120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.