QFEA - A Method for Assessing the Filtration Efficiency of Face Mask Materials for Early Design Prototypes and Home Mask Makers
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in the design and production of fabric face coverings. There are few published methods which enable mask designers, makers and purchasers to assess the relative filtration ability of mask making materials. Those methods which do exist are prohibitively expensive and difficult to conduct. As a result, mask makers, non-profits, and small-scale designers face difficult decisions when designing face coverings for personal and commercial use. In this paper, we propose a novel method, the Qualitative Filtration Efficiency Assessment (QFEA), for easily and inexpensively comparing the filtration efficiency of common materials. This method provides a highly affordable and readily available way to assess potential mask materials.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.14.20221937: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Testing Procedure: Seven participants of different ages and genders underwent a blind validation study, with two participants taking the study with both sweet and bitter solutions. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Study Limitations: Not every participant was able to taste …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.14.20221937: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Testing Procedure: Seven participants of different ages and genders underwent a blind validation study, with two participants taking the study with both sweet and bitter solutions. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Study Limitations: Not every participant was able to taste each solution. In fact, one participant was unable to taste either the sweet or bitter solution. Other participants had a diminished ability to taste one or both of the solutions. This issue has been well identified in qualitative fit testing upon which this evaluation method is based. As with any qualitative fit tests, the results are subjective and depend on the sensitivity of the tester. When conducting back-to-back tests, ‘aftertaste’ from the prior sample was found to sometimes affect the evaluation of the succeeding sample. Buildup of taste continued to be a problem, with participants tending to report mild taste sensations for high-performance filter materials if they were presented later in the test or chose not to use the provided water to rinse their mouth and clear existing taste. To help mediate this, participants were asked to take breaks between samples and/or drink water to clear their palate. This was believed to be the case during Test 8, where the participant did not take the opportunity to drink water or take breaks between tests.
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.
-
