The following literature serves to evaluate and educate the students engineers and readers on the main topics of the MEOW and how we dedicated time and research toward this project. Previous work on this project have used different forms of literature to explain or otherwise demonstrate ways of interpreting information for this project. Provided below are a few of the resources we used to research and complete this project.

Related works[edit | edit source]

Examine what sort of work has been done on the topic and identify new possible issues or any recent research that has brought up issues about past assumptions.

Planning the review[edit | edit source]

To carry out the planning, you must follow these steps:

1. Identify the need for a literature review. To do this, you need to answer the following questions

  • Is the research area developed enough, with many published studies?
  • Are there recent reviews on the same topic?

2. Define the research questions that you intend to answer with the review

  • These questions are used to build keywords to search for articles in bibliographic databases.
  • They determine what information will be extracted from the articles to be analyzed, called primary studies.
  • Once defined in the planning phase, these issues cannot be changed in the following phases.
  • We recommend an expert on the subject reviews the questions still in the protocol construction phase.
  • Previous literature reviews in the same or similar areas can help define these problems.

3. Construction and development of the protocol

  • In this point, the entire step-by-step procedure for the lit. review is defined. The steps must be well defined to reduce the possibility of errors in the execution of the review.
  • All lit. review authors should participate in the development of the protocol.
  • It's important to simulate the execution of the protocol, which will help find possible errors in each of the steps.

4. Protocol evaluation

  • Protocol evaluation is critical as this step will determine how all the research will be conducted.
Example

Effectiveness[edit | edit source]

  • Measurements in relation to graded masks (N95, N100). Results from literature still have a wide variety of ranges (10%-70%) for face masks, which serves to understand that not all DIY masks are made and wore the same.
  • DIY evaluation (testing in experimental conditions and real use feedback)
  • Adaptation to different face shapes and sizes: designs need to be adaptable or parametric.
  • Good practices of making and using masks must be reproduced in order for masks to make sense.

Filter materials[edit | edit source]

  • Industrial filters: some DIY designs are currently considering the use of HEPA filters. Consider questions such as the cost and availability of these filters in your location for sustained use by healthcare workers or the general population.
  • Tea towel (tea cloth) or fabric layers: Some studies corroborate the feasibility of using layered fabric to make masks. Different considerations must be used when designing cloth masks.
  • EVA filter: Some DIY projects have used EVA as a filter, due to it being a cheap and widely-available material.
  • PLA or other 3D-printed materials: a current discussion has been raised around the porous quality of 3D-printed masks, which raises the question of whether they are the best material for home-made masks.

Cost and appropriateness[edit | edit source]

  • Availability of materials: how easy are the materials easy to find? Are they found everywhere in the world?
  • Overall cost: How much does it cost to reproduce.
  • Easiness of documentation: are these masks fully reproducible? Are there variations in how people will make them?
  • Lack of digital fabrication tools in certain areas can limit how these masks are made.

Hygiene[edit | edit source]

  • Will they be reused/disinfected? Heat, UV light, water, soap, alcohol.
  • Availability of replacement filters or masks.
  • Microplastics from 3D printing having an effect on health due to a sustained use.
  • Where does the humidity from the wearer's mouth go.

Comfort and ergonomics[edit | edit source]

  • People will wear a mask for longer if they feel comfortable with it.
  • More protective masks are less comfortable to breathe through.

Conducting the review[edit | edit source]

1. Search for primary studies

  • Collecting information while visiting websites and/or proceedings in search of articles on the investigated topic.
  • Collecting information while visiting digital libraries to search for articles according to a certain keyword. Examples of digital libraries: Google Scholar, Citeseer Library, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Scielo, CAPES Journal Portal, BVS, etc.
  • Snowballing: gathering a list of articles in search of new studies.

2. Select primary studies

  • You will need to select which studies will be considered to analyze in your literature review. At this stage, you have to eliminate irrelevant studies found in the previous step.

3. Assess the quality of the studies

  • Search for material that has little or poor quality of information.

4. Data extraction

  • We must identify information from each primary study. The approach to be used is to answer each research question with the information in these studies.

5. Data synthesis

Report the review[edit | edit source]

  • Explain how the results will be displayed, write the results and their interpretation.

The objective of a literature review is to identify, analyze, assess and interpret the body of knowledge on a specific topic.

Example

DIY mask design and testing[edit | edit source]

30x-Bookmark.png
Shaffer, R., Krah Cichowicz, J., Chew, G., & Hsu, J. (2018). Non-occupational Uses of Respiratory Protection – What Public Health Organizations and Users Need to Know. NIOSH Science Blog. Retrieved March 20, 2021, from https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2018/01/04/respirators-public-use/
  • Research Questions you're answering:
  • Summary notes from article/source:
    • Masks are likely to be worn incorrectly: independently of the mask used, a great part of the effort must be put into training the general population on the correct usage of masks.
    • Fit tests must be performed for each user.
30x-Bookmark.png
MacIntyre CR, Seale H, Dung TC, et al. A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open 2015;5:e006577. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577
  • This study recommends against the use of cloth masks.
  • "Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%."

Mask assesment[edit | edit source]

30x-Bookmark.png
Xiao J, Shiu EYC, Gao H, Wong JW, Fong MW, Ryu S, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in nonhealthcare settings—personal protective and environmental measures. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 March 24. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2605.190994
  • Medical masks: "There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure (...)"
  • "Proper use of face masks is essential because improper use might increase the risk for transmission."
30x-Bookmark.png
Shakya, K., Noyes, A., Kallin, R. et al. Evaluating the efficacy of cloth facemasks in reducing particulate matter exposure. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 27, 352–357 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2016.42

"When the cloth masks were tested against lab-generated whole diesel particles, the filtration efficiency for three particle sizes (30, 100, and 500 nm) ranged from 15% to 57%."


This is another way to document your findings: Synthesis matrix. You can use your own method as long as you can identify the knowledge gaps that exist on the subject.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

The conclusions must be related to the study's objectives and avoid statements not sufficiently supported by the available data. In addition, they have to be clear and concise.

Bibliography[edit | edit source]

They will be carried out according to the established norms (APA, etc.)

Example
  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Shaffer, R., Krah Cichowicz, J., Chew, G., & Hsu, J. (2018). Non-occupational Uses of Respiratory Protection – What Public Health Organizations and Users Need to Know. NIOSH Science Blog. Retrieved March 20, 2021, from https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2018/01/04/respirators-public-use/
  • MacIntyre CR, Seale H, Dung TC, et al. A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open 2015;5:e006577. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577
  • Jung, H., Kim, J., Lee, S., Lee, J., Kim, J., Tsai, P., & Yoon, C. (2014). Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res, 14(14), 991-1002. Retrieved from: http://aaqr.org/files/article/668/36_AAQR-13-06-OA-0201_991-1002.pdf

Appendices[edit | edit source]

Figures, questionnaires, tables, etc., can be included.

FA info icon.svg Angle down icon.svg Page data
Authors Kathy Nativi, Emilio Velis
License CC-BY-SA-4.0
Language English (en)
Related 0 subpages, 1 pages link here
Impact 209 page views
Created February 15, 2023 by Alex Buangsuwon
Modified February 15, 2023 by Alex Buangsuwon
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.