Effectiveness of copper as a preventive tool in health care facilities. A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a significant clinical and economic burden on health systems worldwide. Copper alloys have been certified by the US EPA as solid antimicrobial materials, but their effectiveness in reducing HAIs is not well established OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to assess copper surfaces in situ efficacy in reducing health care's microbial burden compared to control surfaces. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted using three electronic databases: Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus, with the keywords "copper" and "surfaces" and "antimicrobial" and "antibacterial" and "infections." Studies from 2010 to 2022 were included. The quality of the studies was independently screened and assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: A total of 56 articles were screened, with 8 included in the review and 7, added from references. Two third of the studies report a significant reduction in the microbial burden on copper objects compared to control objects. The 2 studies with the highest scores on NOS evaluation indicated that using copper or copper alloys in healthcare settings can effectively decrease the number of bacterial contaminations on touch surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest the potential effectiveness of copper as a preventive tool in healthcare facilities, but further studies and longer trials are needed to establish a relationship between copper and reduced nosocomial infections.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".