SynthesisBMJ global health2025
Efficacy and effectiveness of hand hygiene-related practices used in community settings for removal of organisms from hands: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and effectiveness of hand hygiene-related practices used in community settings for removal of organisms from hands: a systematic review.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Guidance and ablutions: optimising hand hygiene in public health.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- We have the evidence but governments must now build the systems to deliver on hand hygiene.BMJ global health · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis systematic review collected and synthesised evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of commonly used hand hygiene materials and methods for removing or inactivating pathogens on hands in community settings. The evidence was generated to support the development of the WHO Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Community Settings.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, PAIS Index, WHO IRIS, UN Digital Library and World Bank eLibrary, and consulted experts in March 2023 for studies published between 1 January 1980 and 29 March 2023. Eligible studies included laboratory and field studies measuring reduction in organisms on hands after washing as intended in community settings; healthcare settings were excluded. Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study; risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool and a laboratory-based quality assessment tool. Summary results in terms of log
resultsOf 177 studies that met inclusion criteria, the majority focused on alcohol-based hand sanitiser (111, 63%) and handwashing with soap and water (110, 62%). Most evidence (119, 67%) assessed bacterial reductions and only 7 (4%) studies addressed enveloped viruses. Across studies, there was a >2 log
conclusionsThe ability to compare efficacy across materials and methods was limited due to the focus on bacteria and soap and water and alcohol-based sanitisers. Additional evidence quantifying the impact of handwashing on viruses (especially enveloped viruses), handwashing alternatives other than alcohol-based sanitisers, drying methods and microbial water quality, as well as the effectiveness of many of these products in the field would support more evidence-based recommendations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023429145.
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.