ArticleCureus2025
A Comparative Analysis of Bacterial Communities in Settled Air Dust and Vacuumed Surface Dust From University Dormitories and Associations With Respiratory Health.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe indoor microbiome significantly impacts human health. Different sampling methods are used to characterize this environment, but it is unclear how these methods affect the resulting microbial profiles and health-related interpretations. This study aimed to compare the bacterial communities captured by two common methods, i.e., passive collection of settled air dust and active vacuuming of surface dust, and to evaluate how sampling choice influences epidemiological associations with respiratory health.
methodsWe collected paired settled air dust (n = 86) and vacuumed surface dust (n = 83) samples from 87 university dormitory rooms. The bacterial composition was characterized by sequencing the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene. We analyzed differences in bacterial diversity, taxonomic composition, predicted functional profiles, and associations with self-reported student health data (rhinitis, asthma, and respiratory infections).
resultsThe two sampling methods captured drastically different bacterial communities (PERMANOVA R² = 0.65, p < 0.001). Vacuumed dust samples were dominated by the genus
conclusionThe choice between sampling settled air dust versus vacuumed surface dust provides profoundly different views of the indoor bacteriome, which can lead to contradictory conclusions in epidemiological studies of asthma and respiratory illness. Our findings underscore that the selection of an environmental sampling strategy is a critical methodological decision that can dictate the outcome and potential health implications of indoor microbiome research. Researchers must align their sampling method with a clear exposure hypothesis to ensure valid health risk assessments. Future indoor air quality standards and epidemiological studies should consider implementing multi-method sampling to capture a comprehensive profile of microbial exposure.
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.