Notice bibliographique
Résumé
LettersApril 2021Cloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19FREEMaxwell G. Anderson, PhDMaxwell G. Anderson, PhDVancouver, British Columbia, CanadaSearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/L21-0090 SectionsAboutVisual AbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR: In a comment on Clase and colleagues' commentary (1), FitzGerald cites Bae and associates' conclusion that “both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface” (2). Of note, Bae and associates' brief research report was retracted on 2 June 2020. Further, my analysis of Bae and associates' published data indicates that filtration efficiency with patients coughing into their masks averaged approximately 76% or possibly slightly lower because of their limits of detection. Surgical masks are often found to have 98% to 99% virus filtration efficiency under ideal conditions and approximately 80% in actual practice, with variation among brands, models, and wearers. As such, Bae and associates' data were within normal expectations in that regard. Unfortunately, more than 80 news outlets repeated Bae and associates' claim that masks were “ineffective.”Clase and colleagues encourage mask wearing while stating, “There is absence of evidence that public mask wearing protects either the wearer or others” (3). However, Leffler and coworkers' analysis (4) published on 23 April 2020 is evidence that public mask wearing reduced COVID-19 by an order of magnitude.References1. Clase CM, Fu EL, Joseph M, et al. Cloth masks may prevent transmission of COVID-19: an evidence-based, risk-based approach [Editorial]. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173:489-91. [PMID: 32441991]. doi: 10.7326/M20-2567 LinkGoogle Scholar2. Bae S, Kim MC, Kim JY, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: a controlled comparison in 4 patients [Letter]. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173:W22-3. [PMID: 32251511]. doi: 10.7326/M20-1342 LinkGoogle Scholar3. Clase CM, Fu EL, Jardine M, et al. Re: Cloth masks may prevent transmission of COVID-19: an evidence-based, risk-based approach. Online comment. Annals.org. 2 February 2021. Accessed at www.annals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-2567 on 17 February 2021. Google Scholar4. Leffler CT, Ing E, Lykins JD, et al. Country-wide coronavirus mortality and use of masks by the public. ResearchGate. Preprint posted online 23 April 2020. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.35208.37125 Google Scholar Comments 0 Comments Sign In to Submit A Comment Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Maxwell G. Anderson, PhDAffiliations: Vancouver, British Columbia, CanadaDisclosures: The author has reported no disclosures of interest. The form can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=L21-0090. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoCloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19: An Evidence-Based, Risk-Based Approach Catherine M. Clase , Edouard L. Fu , Meera Joseph , Rupert C.L. Beale , Myrna B. Dolovich , Meg Jardine , Johannes F.E. Mann , Roberto Pecoits-Filho , Wolfgang C. Winkelmayer , and Juan J. Carrero Cloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19 Catherine M. Clase , Edouard L. Fu , Meg Jardine , Johannes F.E. Mann , Juan J. Carrero Cloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19 Kouji H. Harada , Mariko Harada Sassa Cloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19 George FitzGerald Metrics Cited byA Miniaturized Electrostatic Precipitator Respirator Effectively Removes Ambient SARS-CoV-2 Bioaerosols April 2021Volume 174, Issue 4 Page: 579-580 ePublished: 20 April 2021 Issue Published: April 2021 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2021 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 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 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».