ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluation of disinfection efficiency of new high oxygen membrane air disinfecting machine in hospital ward environment.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the air disinfection efficacy of a novel high-oxygen membrane air sterilizer in hospital ward environments. Natural bacteria were used as indicator microorganisms, and air disinfection experiments were conducted under both unoccupied and occupied ward conditions to compare the actual disinfection performance between a high-oxygen membrane air sterilizer and a plasma air sterilizer. The relationship between disinfection efficacy and factors such as ward volume, temperature, humidity, initial bacterial load, and personnel movement was analyzed. Under unoccupied conditions, the natural bacterial extinction rate of the high-oxygen membrane air disinfecting machine was 88.4%, significantly higher than the 82.5% of the plasma air disinfecting machine (P = 0.019). However, under occupied conditions, there was no statistically significant difference in extinction rates between the two devices (80.0% vs. 78.7%, P = 0.165). Additionally, the disinfection efficacy of the high-oxygen membrane air disinfecting machine was not statistically affected by ward volume, temperature, humidity, initial bacterial concentration, or personnel activity (all P > 0.05) within the present experimental settings. Although high-oxygen membrane air disinfection technology demonstrates statistically superior disinfection performance in unoccupied environments, the observed efficacy does not currently support its use as a standalone intervention for reducing the airborne infection transmission. Further research in diverse clinical environments is needed to fully assess its potential.
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.