ArticleCurrent research in microbial sciences2025
Environmental biocontamination by SARS-CoV-2 Virus in the hospital setting.
Article in Current research in microbial sciences, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Demonstrating the capability to isolate biological material from the environment was fundamental to supporting any transmission route. Various and inconsistent methodologies have been used to address this issue; however, the debate in scientific societies about the possibility of airborne transmission as a source of SARS-CoV-2 spread remained open. Objective: To analyze SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the air and on surfaces in a hospital setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This study involved air and surface sampling in the emergency, hospitalization, and intensive care unit areas of the Ramón y Cajal University Hospital. A consistent methodology was used for all samples, and clinical and environmental parameters and characterization of each location were recorded. Results: A total of 234 samples were collected, comprising 160 surface samples and 74 air samples, of which 6.84 % tested positive (13/160 surface samples and 3/74 air samples). High-contact surfaces had the highest proportion of positive samples (12/13). All positive air samples were identified within 2 m of patients who had recently developed symptoms (<5 days). High dependency and elevated temperatures seemed to indicate a higher risk of environmental biocontamination. Additionally, there was a higher risk of contamination in the intensive care units than in the hospitalization or emergency units.
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.