Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39050731›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

On modelling airborne infection risk.

Yannis Drossinos, Nikolaos I Stilianakis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. On modelling airborne infection risk.Royal Society open science · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yannis DrossinosThermal Hydraulics & Multiphase Flow Laboratory, Institute of Nuclear & Radiological Sciences and Technology, Energy & Safety, National Centre for Scientific Research "Demokritos", Agia Paraskevi 15314, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8059-9636
Nikolaos I StilianakisJoint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Ispra, VA 21027, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3808-265X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Airborne infection risk analysis is usually performed for enclosed spaces where susceptible individuals are exposed to infectious airborne respiratory droplets by inhalation. It is usually based on exponential, dose-response models of which a widely used variant is the Wells-Riley (WR) model. We revisit this infection-risk estimate and extend it to the population level. We use an epidemiological model where the mode of pathogen transmission, airborne or contact, is explicitly considered. We illustrate the link between epidemiological models and the WR and the Gammaitoni and Nucci models. We argue that airborne infection quanta are, up to an overall density, airborne infectious respiratory droplets modified by a parameter that depends on biological properties of the pathogen, physical properties of the droplet and behavioural properties of the individual. We calculate the time-dependent risk of being infected for two scenarios. We show how the epidemic infection risk depends on the viral latent period and the event time, the time infection occurs. Infection risk follows the dynamics of the infected population. As the latent period decreases, infection risk increases. The longer a susceptible is present in the epidemic, the higher its risk of infection for equal exposure time to the pathogen is.

Indexed as

aerosolGammaitoni–Nucci infection risk modelinfectious diseasesinfectious respiratory particle (IRP)SARS-CoV-2 transmissionWells–Riley infection risk model

Identifiers

PMID39050731
PMCPMC11265909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.