ArticleACS ES&T air2024
Bipolar Ionization Did Not Reduce Airborne Bacteria in a Lecture Hall.
Article in ACS ES&T air, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Needle point bipolar ionization: environmental safety and inactivation of airborne bacteria and corona virus.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ionization treatment of indoor air has attracted attention for its potential to inactivate airborne pathogens and reduce disease transmission, yet its real-world effectiveness remains unverified. We evaluated the impact of an in-duct, bipolar ionization system on airborne particles, including culturable bacteria, in a lecture hall. The ionizer was off with variable fan speed for 1 week, on with variable fan speed for a second week, and on with high and constant fan speed for a third week. We measured ion concentrations and aerosol particle concentrations, and we collected bioaerosol samples for analysis of 16S rRNA gene copies representing total bacteria and colony forming units (CFUs) on Tryptic Soy Agar representing culturable bacteria. There were no significant differences in positive, in-room ion concentrations between any weeks; however, negative, in-room ion concentrations were significantly lower when the ionizer was on with constant fan speed. To account for day-to-day variability in total bacteria concentrations, related to occupancy and other factors, we examined the ratio of CFUs to 16S rRNA gene copies (CFU gc
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.