Cited by 395Infection Control and VentilationAerosol Filtration and Electrostatic PrecipitationTextile materials and evaluations

An overview of filtration efficiency through the masks: Mechanisms of the aerosols penetration

Open access
Tcharkhtchi, A., Abbasnezhad, N., Zarbini Seydani, M., Zirak, N., Farzaneh, S., Shirinbayan, M.·2021·Bioactive Materials

Abstract

The masks have always been mentioned as an effective tool against environmental threats. They are considered as protective equipment to preserve the respiratory system against the non-desirable air droplets and aerosols such as the viral or pollution particles. The aerosols can be pollution existence in the air, or the infectious airborne viruses initiated from the sneezing, coughing of the infected people. The filtration efficiency of the different masks against these aerosols are not the same, as the particles have different sizes, shapes, and properties. Therefore, the challenge is to fabricate the filtration masks with higher efficiency to decrease the penetration percentage at the nastiest conditions. To achieve this concept, knowledge about the mechanisms of the penetration of the aerosols through the masks at different effective environmental conditions is necessary. In this paper, the literature about the different kinds of face masks and respiratory masks, common cases of their application, and the advantages and disadvantages of them in this regard have been reviewed. Moreover, the related mechanisms of the penetration of the aerosols through the masks are discussed. The environmental conditions affecting the penetration as well as the quality of the fabrication are studied. Finally, special attention was given to the numerical simulation related to the different existing mechanisms.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.002

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some degree of leakage is expected around the edges of surgical and cloth masks, and poor mask fit or improper usage can further increase mask bypass and decrease effectiveness.

    “Some degree of leakage is expected around the edges of surgical and cloth masks in particular; poor mask fit and improper usage can further increase mask bypass, leading to a significant decrease in effectiveness [15,16,17].”

    From Comparative Mask Protection against Inhaling Wildfire Smoke, Allergenic Bioaerosols, and Infectious Particles (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Leakage section says that almost all masks can leak, discusses leakage through surgical masks, and reports that leakage can reduce performance by about 50% or more. The Conclusions section links poor sealing or mask displacement to reduced efficiency. The copy does not specifically establish edge leakage in cloth masks or identify improper usage as a cause of increased bypass. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • To achieve improved mask performance will depend significantly on the face covering design, in particular the face seal, and incorporating materials used in their construction that exploit all mechanisms of filtration.

    “To achieve improved mask performance will depend significantly on the face covering design, in particular the face seal, and incorporating materials used in their construction that exploit all mechanisms of filtration [57].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 94 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tcharkhtchi, A., Abbasnezhad, N., Zarbini Seydani, M., Zirak, N., Farzaneh, S., & Shirinbayan, M.
Affiliations
Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (FR)
Corresponding author
Shirinbayan, M.
Venue
Bioactive Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
106-122
ISSN
  • 2097-1192 (ISSN-L)
  • 2452-199X
OpenAlex
W3048946657
Cited by
395
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 79 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 12
FWCI
9.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioactive Materials (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SAM, the Arts et Métiers ParisTech open access repository (Paris Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Infection Control and Ventilation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Textile materials and evaluations
Keywords
face masks, filtration efficiency, aerosol penetration, respiratory protection, airborne virus transmission

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review