ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Study on the Effectiveness of a Copper Electrostatic Filtration System "Aerok 1.0" for Air Disinfection.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBioaerosols can represent a danger to health. During SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, portable devices were used in different environments and considered a valuable prevention tool. This study has evaluated the effectiveness of the air treatment device "AEROK 1.0
methodsIn an administrative room, airborne microbial contamination was measured using active (DUOSAS 360 and MD8) and passive sampling; a particle counter was used to evaluate particle concentrations; a Hirst-type pollen trap was used to assess airborne pollen and
resultsThe airborne bacterial contamination assessed by the two different samplers decreased by 56% and 69%, respectively. The airborne bacterial contamination assessed by passive sampling decreased by 44%. For fungi, the reduction was 39% by active sampling. Airborne particles (diameters ≥ 1.0, 2.0 μm) and the ratio of indoor/outdoor concentrations of total pollen and
conclusionsThe results highlight the effectiveness of AEROK 1.0
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.