Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Signal in a Home with COVID-19 Positive Occupants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although many COVID-19 patients quarantine and recover at home, the dispersal of SARS-CoV-2 onto surfaces and dust within the home environment remains poorly understood. To investigate the distribution and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in a quarantine home, samples were collected from a household with two confirmed COVID-19 cases (one adult and one child). Home surface swab and dust samples were collected two months after symptom onset (and one month after symptom resolution) in the household. The strength of the SARS-CoV-2 molecular signal in fomites varied as a function of sample location, surface material and cleaning practices. Notably, the SARS-CoV-2 RNA signal was detected at several locations throughout the household although cleaning appears to have attenuated the signal on many surfaces. Of the 24 surfaces sampled, 46% were SARS-CoV-2 positive at the time of sampling. The SARS-CoV-2 concentrations in dust recovered from floor and HVAC filter samples ranged from 10 4 -10 5 N2 gene copies/g dust. While detection of viral RNA does not imply infectivity, this study confirms that the SARS-CoV-2 RNA signal can be detected at several locations within a COVID-19 quarantine home and can persist after symptoms have resolved. In addition, the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 (normalized per unit mass of dust) recovered in home HVAC filters may prove useful for estimating SARS-CoV-2 airborne levels in homes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".