Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (776 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
Colloids with a gaseous dispersing phase and either liquid (fog) or solid (smoke) dispersed phase; used in fumigation or in inhalation therapy; may contain propellant agents.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Aerosol.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Colloids
- Narrower topics
- Nasal Sprays; Oral Sprays; Aerosol Propellants; E-Cigarette Vapor
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 39,213 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Aerosols” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 8,041 of them (20.5%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 17,077 records.
Reviews account for 2,702 records (6.9%) and meta-analyses for 93. Randomized controlled trials number 2,108 (5.4%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 17,077 |
| 2000-2009 | 5,866 |
| 2010-2019 | 8,229 |
| 2020 onward | 8,041 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 2,702 | 6.9% |
| Meta-analyses | 93 | 0.2% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 2,108 | 5.4% |
Method: PubMed query "Aerosols"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in drugs and chemicals
Studies of a chemical or drug can answer very different questions: what it is and how it behaves in cells and animals, how the body handles it, and whether it changes outcomes in people. Laboratory and animal findings often do not carry over to patients, and observational studies of exposures are confounded by who uses a substance and why. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to use, avoid, start or stop any substance or medicine; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist about your own situation. Check the dose, the species, the comparison group and whether a patient-relevant outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model Calculations of Aerosol Transmission and Infection Risk of COVID-19 in Indoor Environments | 2020 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 122 | cc by PMID 33153155 · DOI · PMC7662582 |
| Heterogeneity in transmissibility and shedding SARS-CoV-2 via droplets and aerosols | 2021 | Meta-analysis Design not recorded in structured metadata | 118 | cc by PMID 33861198 · DOI · PMC8139838 |
| Secondary organic aerosol association with cardiorespiratory disease mortality in the United States | 2021 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 96 | cc by PMID 34916495 · DOI · PMC8677800 |
| A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections | 2025 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 1 | cc by PMID 40299893 · DOI · PMC12040087 |
Model Calculations of Aerosol Transmission and Infection Risk of COVID-19 in Indoor Environments [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The role of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 viruses in airborne transmission of COVID-19 has been debated.
- Closing excerpt
- A particularly effective mitigation measure is the use of high-quality masks, which can drastically reduce the indoor infection risk through aerosols.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (210 words)
The role of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 viruses in airborne transmission of COVID-19 has been debated. The aerosols are transmitted through breathing and vocalization by infectious subjects. Some authors state that this represents the dominant route of spreading, while others dismiss the option. Here we present an adjustable algorithm to estimate the infection risk for different indoor environments, constrained by published data of human aerosol emissions, SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, infective dose and other parameters. We evaluate typical indoor settings such as an office, a classroom, choir practice, and a reception/party. Our results suggest that aerosols from highly infective subjects can effectively transmit COVID-19 in indoor environments. This "highly infective" category represents approximately 20% of the patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We find that "super infective" subjects, representing the top 5-10% of subjects with a positive test, plus an unknown fraction of less-but still highly infective, high aerosol-emitting subjects-may cause COVID-19 clusters (>10 infections). In general, active room ventilation and the ubiquitous wearing of face masks (i.e., by all subjects) may reduce the individual infection risk by a factor of five to ten, similar to high-volume, high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtering. A particularly effective mitigation measure is the use of high-quality masks, which can drastically reduce the indoor infection risk through aerosols.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33153155 · DOI · PMC7662582
Heterogeneity in transmissibility and shedding SARS-CoV-2 via droplets and aerosols [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundWhich virological factors mediate overdispersion in the transmissibility of emerging viruses remains a long-standing question in infectious disease epidemiology.
- Closing excerpt
- FundingNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant program, NSERC Senior Industrial Research Chair program and the Toronto COVID-19 Action Fund.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (211 words)
BackgroundWhich virological factors mediate overdispersion in the transmissibility of emerging viruses remains a long-standing question in infectious disease epidemiology.MethodsHere, we use systematic review to develop a comprehensive dataset of respiratory viral loads (rVLs) of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-1 and influenza A(H1N1)pdm09. We then comparatively meta-analyze the data and model individual infectiousness by shedding viable virus via respiratory droplets and aerosols.ResultsThe analyses indicate heterogeneity in rVL as an intrinsic virological factor facilitating greater overdispersion for SARS-CoV-2 in the COVID-19 pandemic than A(H1N1)pdm09 in the 2009 influenza pandemic. For COVID-19, case heterogeneity remains broad throughout the infectious period, including for pediatric and asymptomatic infections. Hence, many COVID-19 cases inherently present minimal transmission risk, whereas highly infectious individuals shed tens to thousands of SARS-CoV-2 virions/min via droplets and aerosols while breathing, talking and singing. Coughing increases the contagiousness, especially in close contact, of symptomatic cases relative to asymptomatic ones. Infectiousness tends to be elevated between 1 and 5 days post-symptom onset.ConclusionsIntrinsic case variation in rVL facilitates overdispersion in the transmissibility of emerging respiratory viruses. Our findings present considerations for disease control in the COVID-19 pandemic as well as future outbreaks of novel viruses.FundingNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant program, NSERC Senior Industrial Research Chair program and the Toronto COVID-19 Action Fund.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33861198 · DOI · PMC8139838
Secondary organic aerosol association with cardiorespiratory disease mortality in the United States [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Fine particle pollution, PM2.
- Closing excerpt
- 5 requires consideration of SOA.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (149 words)
Fine particle pollution, PM2.5, is associated with increased risk of death from cardiorespiratory diseases. A multidecadal shift in the United States (U.S.) PM2.5 composition towards organic aerosol as well as advances in predictive algorithms for secondary organic aerosol (SOA) allows for novel examinations of the role of PM2.5 components on mortality. Here we show SOA is strongly associated with county-level cardiorespiratory death rates in the U.S. independent of the total PM2.5 mass association with the largest associations located in the southeastern U.S. Compared to PM2.5, county-level variability in SOA across the U.S. is associated with 3.5× greater per capita county-level cardiorespiratory mortality. On a per mass basis, SOA is associated with a 6.5× higher rate of mortality than PM2.5, and biogenic and anthropogenic carbon sources both play a role in the overall SOA association with mortality. Our results suggest reducing the health impacts of PM2.5 requires consideration of SOA.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 34916495 · DOI · PMC8677800
A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Nasal sprays could be used to prevent and manage respiratory tract infections (RTIs).
- Closing excerpt
- Overall, the results highlight the role of beliefs, lifestyle integration, and usage difficulties in nasal spray adherence, with implications for future digital interventions, such as addressing concerns about the nasal spray being perceived as medication.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (206 words)
Nasal sprays could be used to prevent and manage respiratory tract infections (RTIs). As part of a randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17936080), participants received one of two nasal sprays (gel-based vs. saline) and a digital intervention. The digital intervention used behaviour change theories to encourage nasal spray use to reduce the severity and occurrences of RTIs. We explored participants' experiences of the digital intervention and nasal spray. We interviewed 31 participants (aged 19-80), sampled from the two nasal spray intervention trial arms across 3 winter seasons (including at the height of COVID-19). We analysed the interviews using thematic analysis and found two themes regarding facilitators and barriers to nasal spray use. The facilitators of nasal spray use revolved around belief in nasal spray efficacy for infection, belief the nasal spray is safe, motivation to avoid infection, sense of control over infection, and how the nasal spray is integrated into lifestyle. Barriers to nasal spray use included the belief the nasal spray is ineffective, belief the nasal spray is unnecessary, and usage difficulties. Overall, the results highlight the role of beliefs, lifestyle integration, and usage difficulties in nasal spray adherence, with implications for future digital interventions, such as addressing concerns about the nasal spray being perceived as medication.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40299893 · DOI · PMC12040087
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Atmospheric aerosols: composition, transformation, climate and health effects [5]
- Research article Recognition of aerosol transmission of infectious agents: a commentary [6]
- Research article Intratracheal instillation as an exposure technique for the evaluation of respiratory tract toxicity: uses and limitations [7]
- Research article Known and unknown organic constituents in the Earth' s atmosphere [8]
- Research article Aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2? Evidence, prevention and control [9]
- Research article Possible aerosol transmission of COVID-19 and special precautions in dentistry [10]
References
- Lelieveld J, Helleis F, Borrmann S, Cheng Y, Drewnick F, Haug G, et al.. Model Calculations of Aerosol Transmission and Infection Risk of COVID-19 in Indoor Environments. . 2020. PMID 33153155 · DOI · PMC7662582
- Chen PZ, Bobrovitz N, Premji Z, Koopmans M, Fisman DN, Gu FX. Heterogeneity in transmissibility and shedding SARS-CoV-2 via droplets and aerosols. . 2021. PMID 33861198 · DOI · PMC8139838
- Pye HOT, Ward-Caviness CK, Murphy BN, Murphy BN, Appel KW, Seltzer KM. Secondary organic aerosol association with cardiorespiratory disease mortality in the United States. . 2021. PMID 34916495 · DOI · PMC8677800
- Dennis A, Joseph J, Greenwell K, Miller S, Vennik J, Dennison L, et al.. A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. . 2025. PMID 40299893 · DOI · PMC12040087
- Pöschl U. Atmospheric aerosols: composition, transformation, climate and health effects. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2005. PMID 16302183 · DOI
- Tellier R, Li Y, Cowling BJ, Tang JW. Recognition of aerosol transmission of infectious agents: a commentary. BMC Infect Dis. 2019. PMID 30704406 · DOI · PMC6357359
- Driscoll KE, Costa DL, Hatch G, Henderson R, Oberdorster G, Salem H, et al.. Intratracheal instillation as an exposure technique for the evaluation of respiratory tract toxicity: uses and limitations. Toxicol Sci. 2000. PMID 10788556 · DOI
- Goldstein AH, Galbally IE. Known and unknown organic constituents in the Earth' s atmosphere. Environ Sci Technol. 2007. PMID 17396635 · DOI
- Tang S, Mao Y, Jones RM, Tan Q, Ji JS, Li N, et al.. Aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2? Evidence, prevention and control. Environ Int. 2020. PMID 32822927 · DOI · PMC7413047
- Ge ZY, Yang LM, Xia JJ, Fu XH, Zhang YZ. Possible aerosol transmission of COVID-19 and special precautions in dentistry. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2020. PMID 32425001 · DOI · PMC7089481
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-31.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.