ReviewJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Airborne Fungal Monitoring in Healthcare Environments: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFungal infections pose a significant threat to public health, with over 6.55 million cases and 2.55 million deaths annually. Exposure to fungal spores in indoor environments primarily occurs through inhalation or direct contact with surfaces. Monitoring is critical for early detection and prevention of outbreaks, yet routine airborne fungal testing is not universally mandated across healthcare settings.
methodsA systematic review of peer-reviewed articles from four databases was conducted to identify current airborne fungal monitoring guidelines and best practices for sample collection, culture media, incubation conditions, and results interpretation.
resultsEighteen articles met the inclusion criteria, and four studies discussed potential guidelines for acceptable airborne fungal levels in healthcare environments. Guidelines ranged from <1 CFU/m
conclusionsThe need for globally recognized fungal monitoring standards is pressing. Without them, preventable fungal exposure will persist, risking severe, potentially fatal infections for patients and healthcare workers.
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.