Sampling of elementary school playground equipment for total coliforms and E. coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract

 Background and Purpose: Outbreaks of enteric diseases in schools and daycares are common. It is possible that these outbreaks could be propagated via fomites in school settings, such as playground equipment that is not regularly cleaned. Studies thus far have provided conflicting results on the level of contamination present on fomites in the school setting. This project is intended to assess the level of microbial contamination present on elementary school playground surfaces as a result of hand contact from school children. Methods: Two categories of elementary school playground equipment were sampled in this study; those that are likely to see regular hand contact from children and those that were not likely see hand regular hand contact from children. 30 surfaces of each category were swabbed and the media will be plated and incubated to enumerate total coliforms and E. coli. Results: The mean number of total coliforms on high hand contact surfaces was 0.2333 cfu/100cm2, while the mean number of total coliforms on low hand contact surfaces was 0.2667 cfu/100cm2. The t-test analysis of total coliform results produced a p-value of 0.5566. The mean number of E. coli on high hand contact surfaces was 1.1333 cfu/100cm2, while the mean number of E. coli on low hand contact surfaces was 4.9000 cfu/100cm2. The t-test analysis of E. coli results produced a p-value of 0.8019. Discussion: Neither results for total coliforms or E. coli indicated significantly different numbers on high or low hand contact surfaces. This indicates that these total coliform and E. coli may not be present as a result of hand contact. Conclusion: These results do not support the deposition of coliforms or E. coli on playground equipment as a result of hand contact. However, there is still concern due to the number of samples positive for E. coli. These results suggest the need for practices such as regular hand washing in the school setting after using the playground, regular cleaning of playground materials and EHO inspections of school grounds.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".