ArticleScientific reports2025
Corneal safety assessment of germicidal far UV-C radiation.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Far UV-C radiation (200-240 nm) is a promising alternative to conventional UV-C for disinfection in occupied spaces, offering strong germicidal efficacy with reduced skin risk. However, its ocular safety remains unclear, as most studies relied only on non-human corneal models with physiological differences. This study investigated UV-induced DNA damage in the epithelium, stroma, and endothelium of ex vivo human corneas and porcine corneas, and reconstructed human cornea epithelium (RHCE) using immunohistochemistry. Samples were exposed to 222 nm, 233 nm, 254 nm, and broadband UV-B (280-400 nm) radiation in the presence of real human tears. Compared to human corneas (26 μm mean epithelium thickness), porcine corneas (110 μm) and RHCE (79 μm), showed reduced UV penetration. In human corneas with a thin epithelium, far UV-C exposure led to epithelial and anterior stromal damage, underscoring the epithelium's protective function. Optical properties using porcine corneas confirmed the immunohistological findings, validating wavelength-dependent penetration depths. Simulations suggest that in intact human corneas, damage-relevant intensity of 222 nm light reaches the middle of the epithelium, while for 233 nm, it reaches the basal layer. These findings support the relative safety of far UV-C, especially 222 nm, for intact corneas. However, potential DNA damage accumulation after repeated exposures underscores the need for further research on long-term ocular effects.
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.