Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40732060›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2025

Detection of Microbial Growth on Indoor Building Materials in Two Countries Using qPCR.

Helena Rintala, Oliver Röhl, Pinja Tegelberg, Teija Meklin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Helena RintalaLabroc Oy Member of GBA Group, P.O. Box 1199, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.
Oliver RöhlGBA Gesellschaft für Bioanalytik mbH, Schelsenweg 24a, 41238 Mönchengladbach, Germany.
Pinja TegelbergLabroc Oy Member of GBA Group, P.O. Box 1199, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.
Teija MeklinLabroc Oy Member of GBA Group, P.O. Box 1199, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.

Funding

GBA Group supported the writing of the manuscript.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to several reports, 10-50% of buildings in Europe and worldwide suffer from moisture problems, which can lead to microbial growth in building materials. Unrepaired moisture and microbial damage can lead to the degradation of building structures and reduce visual appeal, resulting in economic losses; they can also result in adverse health effects for the building's occupants. Consequently, robust and reliable methods for the detection of abnormal microbiological conditions in buildings are needed, alongside skilled technical investigations, to plan appropriate renovation actions. In this work, 964 building material samples, which were obtained as part of routine building investigations in two countries, were analyzed for their fungal content using the qPCR method. Cultivation analysis was performed using the same samples, according to corresponding national guidelines. In a sample subset, the total cell counts after staining with acridine orange were determined. The microbial concentrations obtained with all three methods correlated well. Threshold values for the qPCR results were determined using cultivation as a reference method for both countries separately, with similar values obtained for both datasets. Hence, qPCR has great potential to become a standard method of detecting microbes in indoor environments.

Indexed as

building materialcultivationfungiindoorsqPCR

Identifiers

PMID40732060
PMCPMC12300554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.