ReviewFood and environmental virology2024
Comparative Removal of Poliovirus, Rotavirus SA11 and MS2 Coliphage by Point-of-Use Devices used to Treat Drinking Water and Water Disinfectants: A Review.
Review in Food and environmental virology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Test protocols have been developed to test water treatment devices/systems for use for treating drinking water that are used at the individual and home level to ensure the removal of waterborne viruses. Current test procedures call for the use of poliovirus type 1 and/or rotavirus SA11. Recently we suggested that selected coliphages could be used as surrogates for poliovirus for testing of point-of-use (POU) water treatment devices, however, rotavirus was not used in those studies. The purpose of this review was to compare studies of POU devices which were tested with poliovirus type 1, simian rotavirus SA11 and coliphage MS2 to determine if the behavior of rotavirus SA11 was significantly different. In addition, an attempt was made to compare the relative resistance of these viruses by various disinfectants used to treat drinking water. In all cases SA11 was removed to an equal or greater degree than poliovirus. SA11 was found to be less resistant to halogens, although one study found it to be more resistance to chloramines than poliovirus and MS2. Based on this review, use of coliphages for testing POU devices appear justified. Additionally, data on chloramines for these viruses would be useful to determine if rotavirus is more resistant than poliovirus and MS2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39160380What 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.