ArticlePloS one2024
Monitoring the ventilation of living spaces to assess the risk of airborne transmission of infection using a novel Pocket CO2 Logger to track carbon dioxide concentrations in Tokyo.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Could hybrid work schedules offer infection risk reductions? Insights from a COBuilding and environment · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We employed carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration monitoring using mobile devices to identify location-specific risks for airborne infection transmission. We lent a newly developed, portable Pocket CO2 Logger to 10 participants, to be carried at all times, for an average of 8 days. The participants recorded their location at any given time as cinema, gym, hall, home, hospital, other indoors, other outgoings, pub, restaurant, university, store, transportation, or workplace. Generalized linear mixed model was used for statistical analysis, with the objective variable set to the logarithm of CO2 concentration. Analysis was performed by assigning participant identification as the random effect and location as the fixed effect. The data were collected per participant (seven males, four females), resulting in a total of 12,253 records. Statistical analysis identified three relatively poorly ventilated locations (median values > 1,000 ppm) that contributed significantly (p < 0.0001) to CO2 concentrations: homes (1,316 ppm), halls (1,173 ppm), and gyms (1005ppm). In contrast, two locations were identified to contribute significantly (p < 0.0001) to CO2 concentrations but had relatively low average values (<1,000 ppm): workplaces (705 ppm) and stores (620 ppm). The Pocket CO2 Logger can be used to visualize airborne infectious transmission risk by location to help guide recommendation regarding infectious disease policies, such as restrictions on human flow and ventilation measures and guidelines. In the future, large-scale surveys are expected to utilize the global positioning system, Wi-Fi, or Bluetooth of an individual's smartphone to improve ease and accuracy.
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.