MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigating the Presence of SARS-CoV-2 on the Surfaces, Fomites, and in Indoor Air of a Referral COVID-19 Hospital, Shiraz, Iran

2023· article· en· W6965363365 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndoor airCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ContaminationSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Sampling (signal processing)Indoor air quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an immensely transmissible viral infectious disease caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study aimed to assess the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the indoor air, on the surfaces, and on the fomites of a COVID-19 referral hospital in Shiraz, Iran.Methods: In this cross-sectional study, indoor air sampling was conducted utilizing a standard midget impinger containing 15 ml of viral transfer medium (VTM) equipped with a sampling pump with a flow rate of 10 L min-1 for 60 minutes. Surfaces and fomites were sampled using sterile polyester swabs. The realtime reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was utilized to detect SARS-CoV-2.Results: The RNA of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in about 41.2% indoor air and 32% swab samples. Four out of the six (66.7%) indoor air samples up to a distance of 2 meters from the patient’s bed in intensive care units (ICU-1, ICU-3), accident and emergency (A&E-2), and negative pressure rooms were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. All air samples within 2 to 5 meters of the patient’s bed were negative.Conclusion: This study’s results did not support the airborne SARS-CoV-2 transmission; However, it showed contamination of surfaces and fomites in the studied hospital’s wards.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.394
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.086 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207