SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2024
A Molecular Approach for Detecting Bacteria and Fungi in Healthcare Environment Aerosols: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optical and Electrochemical Biosensors for Detection of Pathogens Using Metal Nanoclusters: A Systematic Review.Biosensors · 2025Pooled it
- Photoinduced Fluorescence Changes in Selected Bacterial Strains Under 405 nm Laser Excitation: An In Vitro Hue-Based Monitoring Approach.Micromachines · 2026Article
- The Role of the Oral Microbiome and Dental Caries in Respiratory Health: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Molecular and serological incidences ofOpen veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Review
- Bone Regeneration Capabilities of Scaffolds Containing Chitosan and Nanometric Hydroxyapatite-Systematic Review Based on In Vivo Examinations.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular methods have become integral to microbiological research for microbial identification. This literature review focuses on the application of molecular methods in examining airborne bacteria and fungi in healthcare facilities. In January 2024, a comprehensive electronic search was carried out in esteemed databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, employing carefully selected keywords such as ((bacteria) OR (virus) OR (fungi)) AND (aerosol) AND ((hospital) OR (healthcare) OR (dental office)) AND ((molecular) OR (PCR) OR (NGS) OR (RNA) OR (DNA) OR (metagenomic) OR (microarray)), following the PRISMA protocol. The review specifically targets healthcare environments with elevated concentrations of pathogenic bacteria. A total of 487 articles were initially identified, but only 13 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The study disclosed that the prevalent molecular methodology for appraising aerosol quality encompassed the utilization of the PCR method, incorporating either 16S rRNA (bacteria) or 18S rRNA (fungi) amplification techniques. Notably, five diverse molecular techniques, specifically PFGE, DGGE, SBT, LAMP, and DNA hybridization methods, were implemented in five distinct studies. These molecular tests exhibited superior capabilities compared to traditional bacterial and fungal cultures, providing precise strain identification. Additionally, the molecular methods allowed the detection of gene sequences associated with antibiotic resistance. In conclusion, molecular testing offers significant advantages over classical microbiological culture, providing more comprehensive information.
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.