ReviewPublic health reviews2026
Ventilation and filtration strategies to reduce respiratory infections in schools: a scoping review.
Review in Public health reviews, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This scoping review examines evidence on ventilation and filtration strategies in schools and their association with respiratory infection incidence and proxy indicators such as CO2, particulate levels, and absenteeism. Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (19 March 2025) for studies published between 2020 and 2025 in English, French, or Italian. Eligible designs included interventional, observational, and modelling studies, as well as reviews. Screening and data extraction were performed using Rayyan, and similar publications were verified with LiteRev. Results: Sixty-two studies met inclusion criteria. Mechanical ventilation, especially with high-efficiency filtration, was associated with lower CO2, fewer airborne particles, and reduced infection incidence or absenteeism. Natural ventilation showed variable effectiveness influenced by climate and window use. Hybrid systems and multilayered approaches provided the greatest reductions in estimated infection risk. Conclusion: Ventilation and filtration strategies reduce respiratory infection risk in schools. Mechanical and hybrid systems perform more reliably than natural ventilation. Further research should address feasibility, safety, sustainability, and implementation in low-resource settings.
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.