ArticleHeliyon2024
Airflow detailed analysis through a face mask using the schlieren technique.
Article in Heliyon, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work presents an exhaustive visualization of the airflow expulsed by a person while breathing, talking, exhaling, and blowing inside a closed room wearing a disposable face mask like those used in hospitals for patient protection and those who care for them. An optical schlieren experimental arrangement was used to obtain some of the relevant physical characteristics of the airflow, such as its refractive index gradient, the distribution of temperature, and the associated velocity field for all the tests developed. We tested three face masks, one of the surgical types and the others of the N95 series with denominations KN95 and 3MN95 (Aura TC-84A-8590). The results show appreciable differences between the masks evaluated; the surgical mask was the one that allowed the most abrupt output airflow through it in the field of view of the experimental setup. However, were also found some differences in the performance of the KN95 and 3MN95 masks. The KN95 face mask had the best performance since it expulsed to its surroundings the lowest airflow with different physical properties to the input airflow. The results obtained are relevant since it was possible to estimate the expulsed airflow velocity as a function of the distance for every face mask tested, which allows for understanding its filtering capacity by restricting the flow of potential pathogens from the mouth or nose of one person to another. Undoubtedly, the airflow behavior determination around a face mask can help to reduce the risk of spreading infectious airborne particles.
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.