ArticlePhotochemistry and photobiology
Film dosimetry for occupant exposure monitoring within Far-UVC installations.
Article in Photochemistry and photobiology. 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.
- Wavelength-dependent DNA damage induced by single wavelengths of UV-C radiation (215 to 255 nm) in a human cornea model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Wavelength-Dependent DNA Damage Induced by Single Wavelengths of UVC Light (215 to 255 nm) in a Human Cornea Model.Research square · 2024Article
- Evaluating tools for predicting and measuring radiometric performance of germicidal ultraviolet systems.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
- Virus inactivation and skin safety studies using far-UVC LEDs.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
- Film dosimetry for occupant exposure monitoring within Far-UVC installations.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
- Using skin bi-fold thickness changes for assessment of SKH-1 mice exposed to UVC radiation.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
Far-UVC radiation between 200 and 230 nm is a promising technology for reducing airborne disease transmission. Previous work with far-UVC lamps has demonstrated the efficacy of far-UVC radiation to inactivate bacteria and viruses while presenting minimal human health hazards. While far-UVC intentionally exposes the occupied space, effectively disinfecting air between occupants, installations must still ensure that occupant eye and skin exposure is within the recommended daily limits. This study examines far-UVC-sensitive films for measuring the dose received by occupants within two real-world far-UVC installations. The film is characterized for accuracy, angular response, wavelength response, and sources of uncertainty in film response, and used to obtain individual exposure doses that account for both the non-uniform irradiance and the unique motion of individuals within the space. Dosimetry results using the films, which account for the time-weighted average exposure of an occupant, ranged from 10% to 49% of the maximum calculated stationary dose based on peak irradiance measurements. Results from this study spotlight the need to incorporate time-weighted average considerations into the design and safety assessment of far-UVC installations to ultimately operate far-UVC technology with its full potential to prevent the spread of potentially fatal infectious diseases.
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.