The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Review of Quantitative Standards and Guidelines for Fungi in Indoor Air
Open accessAbstract
Existing quantitative standards/guidelines for fungi in indoor air issued by governmental agencies are based primarily on baseline data (rather than health effects data), and are either absolute (numerical) or relative (indoor/outdoor comparisons) or a combination of the two. The Russian Federation is the only governmental agency that has binding quantitative regulations for bioaerosols. Recommended guidelines have been proposed or sponsored by North American and European governmental agencies and private professional organizations. A considerable number of frequently cited guidelines have been proposed by individuals based either on baseline data or on personal experience. Quantitative standards/guidelines range from less than 100 CFU/m3 to greater than 1000 CFU/m3 (total fungi) as the upper limit for non-contaminated indoor environments. Major issues with existing quantitative standards and guidelines are the lack of connection to human dose/response data, reliance on short term grab samples analyzed only by culture, and the absence of standardized protocols for data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Urgent research needs include the study of human responses to specific fungal agents, development and widespread use of standard protocols using currently available sampling methodologies, and the development of long term, time-discriminating personal samplers that are inexpensive, easy to use, and amenable to straightforward, relevant analysis.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Airborne bioaerosols and their impact on human health
Kim, K.-H., Kabir, E., & Jahan, S. A. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jes.2017.08.027 · Cited by 543
Health Risk Assessment of Fungi in Home Environments
Verhoeff, A. P., & Burge, H. A. (1997) · Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology · doi:10.1016/s1081-1206(10)63214-0 · Cited by 254
Self-citationHealth Effects of Mycotoxins in Indoor Air: A Critical Review
Robbins, C. A., Swenson, L. J., Nealley, M. L., Kelman, B. J., & Gots, R. E. (2000) · Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · doi:10.1080/10473220050129419 · Cited by 197
Seo, S.-C., Reponen, T., Levin, L., & Grinshpun, S. A. (2009) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.10.018 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Rao, C. Y., Burge, H. A., & Chang, J. C. S.
- Venue
- Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1996-09
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 899-908
- ISSN
- 1047-3289 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-2247
- 2162-2906
- OpenAlex
- W2049694950
- Cited by
- 283
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review of Quantitative Standards and Guidelines for Fungi in Indoor Air. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10473289.1996.10467526
- The paper
- Rao, C. Y., Burge, H. A., & Chang, J. C. S. (1996). Review of Quantitative Standards and Guidelines for Fungi in Indoor Air. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.1996.10467526
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.