ArticleThe Science of the total environment2023
Large eddy simulation of sneeze plumes and particles in a poorly ventilated outdoor air condition: A case study of the University of Houston main campus.
Article in The Science of the total environment, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flow rate selection depends on the size of allergen particles to achieve optimal nasal irrigation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Outdoor social distancing behaviors changed during a pandemic: A longitudinal analysis using street view imagery.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many previous studies using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) have focused on the dynamics of air masses, which are believed to be the carriers of respiratory diseases, in enclosed indoor environments. Although outdoor air may seem to provide smaller exposure risks, it may not necessarily offer adequate ventilation that varies with different micro-climate settings. To comprehensively assess the fluid dynamics in outdoor environments and the efficiency of outdoor ventilation, we simulated the outdoor transmission of a sneeze plume in "hot spots" or areas in which the air is not quickly ventilated. We began by simulating the airflow over buildings at the University of Houston using an OpenFOAM computational fluid dynamics solver that utilized the 2019 seasonal atmospheric velocity profile from an on-site station. Next, we calculated the length of time an existing fluid is replaced by new fresh air in the domain by defining a new variable and selecting the hot spots. Finally, we conducted a large-eddy simulation of a sneeze in outdoor conditions and then simulated a sneeze plume and particles in a hot spot. The results show that fresh incoming air takes as long as 1000 s to ventilate the hot spot area in some specific regions on campus. We also found that even the slightest upward wind causes a sneeze plume to dissipate almost instantaneously at lower elevations. However, downward wind provides a stable condition for the plume, and forward wind can carry a plume even beyond six feet, the recommended social distance for preventing infection. Additionally, the simulation of sneeze droplets shows that the majority of the particles adhered to the ground or body immediately, and airborne particles can be transported more than six feet, even in a minimal amount of ambient air.
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.