Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36339162›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

The little-known history of cleanliness and the forgotten pioneers of handwashing.

Peter Poczai, László Z Karvalics

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

2 authors.

Peter PoczaiFinnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
László Z KarvalicsInstitute of Advanced Studies Kőszeg, Kőszeg, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Handwashing is a simple method for preventing the spread of pathogens. It is now common practice, but this was not always the case. Advocating for it often costed a doctor his career in the 1840s. Hospitals in the early 1800s had little idea of the significance of hygiene; thus, they were often mocked as disease-producing incubators or as "houses of death." Many of the ill and dying were kept on wards with no ventilation or access to clean water; hospitals were found to offer only the most basic care. The mortality rate for patients admitted to hospital was three to five times greater than that for individuals cared for at home. Doctors did not routinely wash their hands until the mid-1800s, and they would proceed straight from dissecting a corpse to delivering a baby, providing the basis for the spread of puerperal fever. Despite advances in modern medicine, healthcare providers still face the issue of infection outbreaks caused by patient care. While the body of scientific data supporting hand hygiene as the key strategy to prevent the spread of pathogens is substantial, we highlight that achieving this crucial, long-awaited breakthrough was a hard task through history.

Indexed as

Hand DisinfectionHand HygieneHandHospitalsHumansHygienebacteriahandwashinghygieneinfectionspuerperal fever

Identifiers

PMID36339162
PMCPMC9632745

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.