ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2022
Exploring spatial averaging of contamination in fomite microbial transfer models and implications for dose.
Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the risk ofFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
- School-informed risk calculator tool for reducing the spread of respiratory viral infection among school-aged children.Indoor environments · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhen modeling exposures from contact with fomites, there are many choices in defining the sizes of compartments representing environmental surfaces and hands, and the portions of compartments involved in contacts. These choices impact dose estimates, yet there is limited guidance for selection of these model parameters.
objectiveThe study objective was to explore methods for representing environmental surface and hand contact areas in exposure models and implications for estimated doses.
methodsA simple scenario was used: an individual using their hands to contact their face and two microbially contaminated environmental surfaces. Four models were developed to explore different compartmentalization strategies: (1) hands and environmental surfaces each represented by one compartment, (2) hands represented by two compartments (fingertips vs. non-fingertip areas) while environmental surfaces were represented by one compartment, (3) hands represented by a single compartment and environmental surfaces represented by two compartments, and (4) hands and environmental surfaces each represented by two compartments. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the influence of heterogeneous surface contact frequency, hand contact type, and hand dominance on dose.
resultsEstimated doses were greatest when hand areas and environmental surfaces were each represented by two compartments, indicating that surface area "dilutes" contaminant concentration and decreases estimated dose. SIGNIFICANCE: Model compartment designations for hands and environmental surfaces affect dose estimation, but more human behavior data are needed. IMPACT STATEMENT: A common problem for exposure models describing exposures via hand-to-surface contacts occurs in the way that estimated contamination across human skin (usually hands) or across environmental surfaces is spatially averaged, as opposed to accounting for concentration changes across specific parts of the hand or individual surfaces. This can lead to the dilution of estimated contaminants and biases in estimated doses in risk assessments. The magnitude of these biases and implications for the accuracy in risk assessments are unknown. We quantify differences in dose for various strategies of compartmentalizing environmental surfaces and hands to inform guidance on future exposure model development.
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.