The impact of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning design features on the transmission of viruses, including the 2019 novel coronavirus: a systematic review of filtration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Historically, viruses have demonstrated airborne transmission. Emerging evidence suggests the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that causes COVID-19 may also spread by airborne transmission. This is more likely in indoor environments, particularly with poor ventilation. In the context of potential airborne transmission, a vital mitigation strategy for the built environment is heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. HVAC features could modify virus transmission potential. A systematic review following international standards was conducted to comprehensively identify and synthesize research examining the effectiveness of filters within HVAC systems in reducing virus transmission. Twenty-three relevant studies showed that: filtration was associated with decreased transmission; filters removed viruses from the air; increasing filter efficiency (efficiency of particle removal) was associated with decreased transmission, decreased infection risk, and increased viral filtration efficiency (efficiency of virus removal); increasing filter efficiency above MERV 13 was associated with limited benefit in further reduction of virus concentration and infection risk; and filters with the same efficiency rating from different companies showed variable performance. Increasing filter efficiency may mitigate virus transmission; however, improvement may be limited above MERV 13. Adapting HVAC systems to mitigate virus transmission requires a multi-factorial approach and filtration is one factor offering demonstrated potential for decreased transmission. Practical Implications In order for filtration to be an effective means of virus removal and transmission control, proper installation is required. As well, professionals should be aware of the fact that similarly rated filters from different companies may offer different virus reduction results. While increasing filtration efficiency (i.e., increasing MERV rating or moving from MERV to HEPA) is associated with virus mitigation, there appears to be diminishing returns for filters rated MERV 13 or higher. Although costs increase with filtration efficiency, filtration costs are lower than the cost of ventilation options with the equivalent reduction in transmission.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".