ArticlePhotochemistry and photobiology
Evaluating tools for predicting and measuring radiometric performance of germicidal ultraviolet systems.
Article in Photochemistry and photobiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating tools for predicting and measuring radiometric performance of germicidal ultraviolet systems.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Germicidal ultraviolet (GUV) air treatment technologies can be effective and safe for reducing airborne disease transmission. Today, GUV systems are designed and evaluated using simulation and measurement tools that require further assessment of their accuracy in estimating fluence rate and irradiance. This article reports results from two experiments where two simulation software (Visual Lighting and Photopia) and two measurement techniques (tetrahedron and cubic approximations) were evaluated against chemical actinometry for quantification of GUV fluence rate in a chamber. Additionally, Visual and Photopia were compared to measurements of planar UV-C irradiance for eye and skin exposure. Results showed that overall mean fluence rates were similar between actinometry and both simulation software for WR GUV systems as well as between actinometry and Photopia for UR GUV systems. The tetrahedron approximation better predicted overall mean fluence rate for WR and UR GUV systems, compared to a cubic approximation which tended to overestimate it. Compared to measurements, simulated eye and skin irradiance varied, with higher variability in simulated eye irradiance. The evaluated simulation software can be used to guide the design of GUV systems but must be supplemented with in situ measurements.
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.