Trial reportTrials2026
Air purifiers in classrooms for infection control: a pilot study including a randomized multiple crossover trial to evaluate effectiveness in reducing particulate matter.
Trial report in Trials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06374316 (Air Purifiers in Classrooms for Infection Control - a Pilot Study), which is not on this 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.
Air Purifiers in Classrooms for Infection Control - a Pilot Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAir purifiers with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters aim to reduce particulate matter from the air, including infectious aerosols, potentially lowering airborne disease transmission in classrooms. This pilot study, informing a larger randomized trial (RCT), explored the acceptability and feasibility of air purifiers in classrooms, and estimated their effect on particulate matter (PM
methodsThis study, conducted in schools in the greater Oslo area, Norway, from January to April 2023, consisted of two parts lasting 6 and 9 weeks, respectively. In part 1, eligible primary school classrooms received either ceiling-mounted or portable purifiers. In part 2, we conducted a three-arm randomized multiple crossover trial of ceiling-mounted versus portable purifiers versus no air purification. Schools with three classrooms on the same floor with adequate space for air purifiers were eligible. We evaluated acceptability and feasibility of installing and operating air purifiers by collecting interview data from students (part 1) and teachers (parts 1 and 2). The feasibility of collecting consent and questionnaires from students' legal guardians and student absences from municipality records was explored. We evaluated superiority of air purification versus no air purification and noninferiority of portable versus ceiling-mounted air purifiers on PM
resultsFive primary schools (five classrooms) and one adult education school (three classrooms) participated in parts 1 and 2 of the study, respectively. Ceiling-mounted and portable air purifiers were feasible to install and operate and were well-accepted by students (n = 11) and teachers (n = 7). No harms were reported. Consent and questionnaires were collected from 23 of 114 students' legal guardians. Collecting absence data from municipality records was feasible, although inconsistencies in teachers' recording affected weekly accuracy. Air purification was superior to no air purification in reducing PM
conclusionsInstalling and operating air purifiers in classrooms is feasible and acceptable. Portable purifiers are user-friendly and reduce PM
trial registrationNCT06374316 (retrospectively registered 15 April 2024).
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.