ArticleiScience2024
Exploring indoor and outdoor dust as a potential tool for detection and monitoring of COVID-19 transmission.
Article in iScience, 2024. 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.
- Machine learning reveals temperature as a key predictor of dengue risk across Thailand's provinces: A 20-year analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Modeling the risk of airborne transmission of respiratory viruses in microgravity.NPJ microgravity · 2026Article
- Modeling the effectiveness of RT-PCR, RT-LAMP, and antigen testing strategies for COVID-19 control.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Real world effectiveness of early ensitrelvir treatment in patients with SARS-CoV-2, a retrospective case series.New microbes and new infections · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination in Thailand: Averted Deaths and Severe Infections Across Age Groups.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- Early treatment with fluvoxamine, bromhexine, cyproheptadine, and niclosamide to prevent clinical deterioration in patients with symptomatic COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial.EClinicalMedicine · 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
38 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the potential of using SARS-CoV-2 viral concentrations in dust as an additional surveillance tool for early detection and monitoring of COVID-19 transmission. Dust samples were collected from 8 public locations in 16 districts of Bangkok, Thailand, from June to August 2021. SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in dust were quantified, and their correlation with community case incidence was assessed. Our findings revealed a positive correlation between viral concentrations detected in dust and the relative risk of COVID-19. The highest risk was observed with no delay (0-day lag), and this risk gradually decreased as the lag time increased. We observed an overall decline in viral concentrations in public places during lockdown, closely associated with reduced human mobility. The effective reproduction number for COVID-19 transmission remained above one throughout the study period, suggesting that transmission may persist in locations beyond public areas even after the lockdown measures were in place.
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.