ArticleJournal of applied microbiology2022
Minding the matrix: The importance of inoculum suspensions on finger transfer efficiency of virus.
Article in Journal of applied microbiology, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fomite workshop recommendations addressing the role of surfaces in virus transmission in the built environment.mSphere · 2025Review
- School-informed risk calculator tool for reducing the spread of respiratory viral infection among school-aged children.Indoor environments · 2025Article
- A risk-risk tradeoff approach for incorporating the public's risk perceptions into quantitative microbial risk assessment.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2025Article
- Resuspension and Dissemination of MS2 Virus from Flooring After Human Activities in Built Environment: Impact of Dust Particles.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Transmission of Viruses from Restroom Use: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment.Food and environmental virology · 2024Article
- Minding the matrix: The importance of inoculum suspensions on finger transfer efficiency of virus.Journal of applied microbiology · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this study was to determine how the transfer efficiency of MS-2 coliphage from the toilet seat to hands and fingertip to lip differs according to the suspension of the inoculum. METHODS AND
resultsHands were sampled after lifting a toilet seat which was inoculated with MS-2 on the underneath side. MS-2 was suspended in a spectrum of proteinaceous and non-proteinaceous solutions. Transfer efficiencies were greatest with the ASTM tripartite soil load (3.02% ± 4.03) and lowest with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (1.10% ± 0.81) for hand-to-toilet seat contacts. Finger-to-lip transfer rates were significantly different (p < 0.05) depending on suspension matrix, with PBS yielding the highest transfer (52.53% ± 4.48%) and tryptose soy broth (TSB) the lowest (23.15% ± 24.27%). Quantitative microbial risk assessment was used to estimate the probability of infection from adenovirus and norovirus from finger contact with a toilet seat.
conclusionsThe greatest transfer as well as the largest variation of transfer were measured for finger-to-lip contacts as opposed to toilet seat-to-finger contacts. These factors influence the estimation of the probability of infection from micro-activity, that is, toilet seat adjustment. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT: Viruses may be transferred from various human excreta with differing transfer efficiencies, depending on the protein content.
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.