ArticleJournal of environmental health science & engineering2021
COVID-19 aerodynamic evaluation of social distancing in indoor environments, a numerical study.
Article in Journal of environmental health science & engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Newborns Exposed to Maternal Influenza: A Scoping Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Modeling airborne transmission of viral genome using computational fluid dynamics simulation: A case study for SARS-CoV-2 virus.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2025Article
- A New Approach for Respiratory Droplet Trajectory: Implications for Viral and Bacterial Disease Transmission in Emergency Departments.Yonago acta medica · 2025Article
- Numerical performance of COScientific reports · 2024Article
- Agent-Based Simulation for Infectious Disease Modelling over a Period of Multiple Days, with Application to an Airport Scenario.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Transport dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 under outdoor conditions.Air quality, atmosphere, & health · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMany countries worldwide have taken early measures to combat the spread of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 by implementing social distancing measures. The main aim of the present work is to examine the feasibility of social distancing (i.e. 1.5 m) in closed spaces taking into account the possibility for airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
methodsA 3D numerical model of human respiration activities, such as breathing and speaking within indoor environments has been simulated with CFD software AVL FIRE R2020. The Eulerian-Eulerian flow model coupled with k-Ɛ approach were employed. With regard to breathing mode, the infected individual is modelled to be breathing 10 times per minute with a pulmonary rate of 6 L/min with a sinusoidal cycle. The present investigation considered air and droplets/particles as separate phases.
resultsThe predicted results suggested that the social distancing (i.e. 1.5 m) is not adequate to reduce the risk of contracting diseases like COVID-19, especially when staying for a longer period in an indoor environment. The person directly facing the infected person inhaled more than 1000 aerosol droplets within 30 min. The results also showed approximately 65 % decrease in the number of inhaled droplets the room is well ventilated.
conclusionsWithin an indoor environment, 1.5 m distance will not be enough to protect the healthy individuals from the droplets coming from an infected person. Also, the situation may become worse with the change of the air ventilation system.
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.