← Reviews
Open accessAnalysisSep 21, 2026

Microbiome stewardship for the indoor built environment: a conceptual framework proposal

A narrative review proposes a 'healthy porosity' model to replace sterility-based thinking in the management of indoor built environment microbiomes.

Evidence levelDNarrative / animal / in vitro / mechanistic
Study typeother
Sample
Effect directionInsufficient
CertaintyVery low
Clinical applicabilityVery low
Overinterpretation risk1/5 · Low
PICO
Population
Intervention
Comparator
Outcome

Context

Indoor built environments lack a native microbial baseline, making application of microbiome stewardship principles developed for natural ecosystems non-trivial. The gap between indoor exposure science and engineering practice motivates this synthesis.

What the study showed

The abstract indicates that moisture control, dust-reservoir maintenance, appropriate filtration, and occupant behaviors are operationally relevant variables for fostering beneficial microbial communities. Evidence synthesis points to health associations with taxonomically rich microbial consortia from soil, dogs, plants, and outdoor environments. The document proposes actionable stewardship goals but presents no original experimental data.

How it was done

Narrative review without formal meta-analysis; number of included studies not reported in the abstract; no defined search time horizon stated.

Risk of bias

Narrative reviews are subject to literature selection bias; absence of explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria and quantitative synthesis limits the strength of conclusions. This analysis is based solely on the available abstract.

Interpretation limit

What this study does NOT prove

This study does not demonstrate causality between any indoor microbiome intervention and human health outcomes.

In clinical practice

No direct clinical recommendation can be derived from this work. The document is relevant to environmental health policymakers and ventilation engineers, not for immediate clinical decision-making.

Limitations

Narrative reviews are subject to literature selection bias; absence of explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria and quantitative synthesis limits the strength of conclusions. This analysis is based solely on the available abstract.

Technical appendix

Version history

  • 1.0 · 2026-09-21 — Auto-generated under Evidence Standard v1.0

Microbiota Weekly

The week in microbiota evidence, in your language. Structured summaries, traceable to the source.