Bacterial growth in personal stainless steel water bottles
Notice bibliographique
Résumé

 Background: There is a general understanding and knowledge among reusable personal water bottle users that there are hazards, such as bacterial growth, associated with poor water bottle hygiene practices. Currently, there is no information associated with outbreaks or cases of illness stemming from poor hygiene on personal water bottles. This may be due to lack of awareness that users have become ill from their own water bottle and have failed to report it. Results from previous studies on personal water bottles have indicated that there is a relationship between higher microbiological counts and the interval between cleaning times; the longer water bottles are left unclean, the higher the microbial count. Methods: 29 randomly sampled stainless steel personal water bottles were swabbed at the mouth piece and 1 brand new personal stainless steel bottle was used as a control. Personal water bottle users were provided with an in-person electronic survey at the time of sample collection. The swabs were plated following the 3M Aerobic Plate Count method and incubated for a total of 72 hours. Plates were counted after 24 hours and 72 hours. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the aerobic bacterial levels (CFU) of personal stainless steel water bottles that were cleaned within one day and those cleaned within a month but more than one day based on the Independent Sample T-test. There was also no statistically significance difference between the aerobic bacterial levels (CFU) of bottles that were rinsed with tap water and those cleaned with soap and water based on the Independent Sample T-test. Conclusion: Based on the results, stainless steel water bottles are not required to be cleaned frequently. It also appears that there is no difference between cleaning with soap and water and just rinsing the bottles with tap water. Despite results showing no statistical difference to support more frequent cleaning and more thorough cleaning practices, these behaviours should be encouraged to prevent and minimize the risk of potential exposure to harmful pathogens.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».