Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42402254›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental microbiology reports2026

Methods for Determining the Number of Mold Fungi in the Air-Current Trends.

Juhi Mishra, Wioletta Przystas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental microbiology 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Juhi MishraDepartment of Air Protection, Faculty of Energy and Environmental Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5087-2315
Wioletta PrzystasDepartment of Air Protection, Faculty of Energy and Environmental Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland.

Funding

Silesian University of Technology 08/020/BKM25/0050
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Indoor fungal contamination poses significant health concerns due to the diversity and dynamic behaviour of airborne spores. Accurate quantification of indoor fungal bioaerosols remains challenging because of variability in sampling efficiency, particle-size resolution, and analytical approaches. This review critically evaluates commonly used physical sampling methods, including Andersen cascade impactors, Coriolis μ liquid cyclones, sedimentation techniques, and filter-based air sampling, with emphasis on volumetric accuracy, reproducibility, and compatibility with downstream molecular analysis. The processes underlying spore aerosolization in indoor environments and their implications for air quality and occupant exposure are discussed. Indoor fungi such as Aspergillus, Penicillium, Cladosporium, and Rhizopus proliferate under high humidity and inadequate ventilation, particularly within damp materials and HVAC systems. Despite technological advances, significant gaps persist in methodological standardization, harmonization of exposure metrics, and integration of indoor-outdoor fungal dynamics. Such heterogeneity limits cross-study comparability and constrains exposure assessment. By systematically comparing available methods and their optimal applications, this review highlights the need for integrated and standardized strategies to improve fungal bioaerosol quantification and support evidence-based indoor air quality management.

Indexed as

Air MicrobiologyAir Pollution, IndoorEnvironmental MonitoringFungiAerosolsSpores, FungalAerosolsair sampling methodsfungal bioaerosolindoor air

Identifiers

PMID42402254
PMCPMC13333197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.