ArticleThe International journal of ventilation2024
A comparative analysis of potential aerosol exposure in a wide-body aircraft cabin using tracer gas and fluorescent particles.
Article in The International journal of ventilation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We compare two aerosol surrogate tracers in aircraft cabins for breathing and coughing sources: tracer gas collected in the ACER Boeing 767 mock-up and fluorescent particles collected in an actual Boeing 767 aircraft by the US Transportation Command (TRANSCOM). Each source was located individually in window and middle seats. Exposure generally decreased with source distance. A window seat breathing source resulted in good agreement between datasets for exposure (as percent of release) for the TRANSCOM hangar-AFT testing mode, which corresponds to the 11-row cabin ACER laboratory space. Average tracer gas exposure for a middle seat breathing source was higher in the ACER study than the fluorescent particle tracer exposure in the TRANSCOM study. Using a coughing source in a window seat, the exposure for the TRANSCOM data was higher within the first two rows from the source before decreasing to and tracking with the ACER levels, until increasing after about 5 m away. A similar trend was recorded for a middle seat coughing source with higher overall exposure for the TRANSCOM data. Sources of exposure variation between the studies include particle deposition. This work helps optimize aerosol dispersion research in aircraft cabins and provides some validation to the existing studies.
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.