ReviewFundamental research2024
Recent progress in online detection methods of bioaerosols.
Review in Fundamental research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seasonal Variations and Indoor-Outdoor Characteristics of Fluorescent Aerosol Particles in Japanese Office Buildings.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Biofiltration of Bioaerosols Emitted from Organic Waste Management Facilities: A Review.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Monitoring and prediction of pathogenic microorganisms in the atmosphere.Fundamental research · 2024Article
- Efficient V-Shaped Substrate for Surface and Volume Enhanced Raman Spectroscopic Analysis of Bioaerosol: Prevention from Potential Health Risk.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Article
- Linkage between Airborne Particulate Matter and Viral Pandemic COVID-19 in Bucharest.Microorganisms · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aerosol transmission of coronavirus disease in 2019, along with the spread of other respiratory diseases, caused significant loss of life and property; it impressed upon us the importance of real-time bioaerosol detection. The complexity, diversity, and large spatiotemporal variability of bioaerosols and their external/internal mixing with abiotic components pose challenges for effective online bioaerosol monitoring. Traditional methods focus on directly capturing bioaerosols before subsequent time-consuming laboratory analysis such as culture-based methods, preventing the high-resolution time-based characteristics necessary for an online approach. Through a comprehensive literature assessment, this review highlights and discusses the most commonly used real-time bioaerosol monitoring techniques and the associated commercially available monitors. Methods applied in online bioaerosol monitoring, including adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence, laser/light-induced fluorescence spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, and bioaerosol mass spectrometry are summarized. The working principles, characteristics, sensitivities, and efficiencies of these real-time detection methods are compared to understand their responses to known particle types and to contrast their differences. Approaches developed to analyze the substantial data sets obtained by these instruments and to overcome the limitations of current real-time bioaerosol monitoring technologies are also introduced. Finally, an outlook is proposed for future instrumentation indicating a need for highly revolutionized bioaerosol detection technologies.
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.