Comparison of the Efficacy of Disinfectant Pre-impregnated Wipes for Decontaminating Stainless Steel Carriers Experimentally Inoculated With Ebola Virus and Vesicular Stomatitis Virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors evaluated four disinfectant pre-impregnated wipes (DPW) for efficacy against Ebola virus Makona variant (EBOV) and vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), Indiana serotype. Steel carriers were inoculated with the infectious virus and then were wiped with DPW in the Wiperator instrument per ASTM E2967-15. Following the use of J-Cloth impregnated with medium (negative control wipes) or the use of activated hydrogen peroxide (AHP)-, ethanol-, sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)-, or single or dual quaternary ammonium compound (QAC)-based DPW, virus recovery from the carriers was assayed by titration assay and by two passages on Vero E6 cells in 6-well plates. The Wiperator also enabled the measurement of potential transfer of the virus from the inoculated carrier to a secondary carrier by the DPW or control wipes. The J-Cloth wipes wetted with medium alone (no microbicidal active) removed 1.9–3.5 log10 of virus from inoculated carriers but transferred ~4 log10 of the wiped virus to secondary carriers. DPW containing AHP, ethanol, NaOCl, or single or dual QAC as active microbicidal ingredients removed/inactivated ~6 log10 of the virus, with minimal EBOV or no VSV virus transfer to a secondary surface observed. In Ebola virus outbreaks, a DPW with demonstrated virucidal efficacy, used as directed, may help to mitigate the unintended spread of the infectious virus while performing surface cleaning.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".