Question: What lab procedure risk aerosols with Covid 19?

Answer passage (source: CDC):
page_title: Frequently Asked Questions about Biosafety and COVID-19
section_headers: Specimen Handling
What are infectious aerosols and droplets?
section_content: Aerosols and droplets containing particles that are <100 μm in diameter
are not visible to the naked eye. Laboratory workers may not be aware that
such particles can be generated during many laboratory procedures and that
these particles could be inhaled or could cross-contaminate work surfaces,
materials, and equipment.
Infectious aerosols are small liquid or solid particles suspended in the
air that contain infectious agents. They can disperse throughout the
laboratory and remain infective over time and distance. These particles are of
a size that may be inhaled into the lower respiratory tract (<5 μm in
diameter). Examples of organisms transmitted by aerosols include spores of
Aspergillus spp., Mycobacterium tuberculosis, rubeola virus (measles), and
varicella-zoster virus (chickenpox).
Droplets traditionally are defined as larger infectious particles (>5 μm
in diameter) that rapidly fall out of the air, contaminating gloves, the
immediate work area, and the mucous membranes of the persons performing the
procedure.
Examples of infectious agents that are transmitted via the droplet route
include Bordetella pertussis, influenza viruses, adenovirus, Mycoplasma
pneumoniae, SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV), group A streptococcus, and
Neisseria meningitidis.
For additional information, refer to the following:

WHO Laboratory Biosafety Manual, 3rdpdf iconexternal icon
2007 Guideline for Isolation Precautions: Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settingspdf iconpdf icon
CDC Isolation Precautions


Reviewer feedback on this answer:
Answer itself does not define which procedures will cause aerosol risk but does give links that may have the information the requester is looking for specifically.
The question is about specific procedures but the answer doesn't not state any.

Reviewer ratings:
Acceptable
Could be Improved

Answer passage (source: CDC):
page_title: Frequently Asked Questions about Laboratory Testing and COVID-19
section_headers: For All Laboratories: Accessing Laboratory Testing
Can a pooling strategy be used to expand nucleic acid testing for SARS-CoV-2?
section_content: In areas with low COVID-19 prevalence, a two-stage specimen pooling approach
can help preserve testing reagents and resources. In the first stage, several
patients’ specimens are combined before extraction, and then tested all at
once. If the test comes back negative, then all of those patients can be
cleared with one test. If the test comes back positive, then all of those
specimens need to be extracted and re-tested individually.
The lower the prevalence of the disease, the larger the optimal pool size can
be. A recent studyexternal
icon from the
Nebraska Public Health Laboratory found that polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
tests for SARS-CoV-2 reliably return a positive result when one positive
sample is mixed with four negatives. Researchers in Germany and Israel have
had similar results.
A pooling strategy is not efficient when the prevalence of COVID-19 is
high. People with symptoms and people who have been exposed to someone with a
confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection should still be tested individually.
Before using a pooling strategy, the laboratory must have the proper
regulatory approvals. If the manufacturer’s guidelines and the emergency use
authorization (EUA) for that SARS-CoV-2 test do not stipulate pooling,
laboratories that use authorized nucleic acid devices can still bridge to
alternative components, including extraction methods, PCR instruments,
software versions, etc., under Section IV. A. 4. of FDA’s Policy for COVID-19
Tests During the Public Health Emergencyexternal
icon. These component changes can be achieved through evaluation
and verification of the performance of the component with the test, without a
new EUA or an amendment to the original EUA. Additional detail and suggested
studies are discussed in FDA’s policy. The process used for such changes must
also comply with Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments
(CLIA) guidelines.

Reviewer feedback on this answer:
Answer concerns itself with a pooling approach to testing and does not discuss anything regarding which procedures might create risk with aerosols.
The question is about what lab procedures can produce aerosolized virus but the answer is pooling samples for testing and us unrelated to the question.

Reviewer ratings:
Bad
Bad

Answer passage (source: CDC):
page_title: Frequently Asked Questions about Biosafety and COVID-19
section_headers: Specimen Handling
What procedures can generate aerosols and droplets?
section_content: Many routine laboratory procedures can potentially generate aerosols and
droplets that are often undetectable. The following laboratory procedures have
been associated with the generation of infectious aerosols and droplets:
centrifugation, pipetting, vortexing, mixing, shaking, sonicating, removing
caps, decanting liquids, preparing smears, flaming slides, aliquoting and
loading specimens, loading syringes, manipulating needles, syringes or sharps,
aspirating and transferring blood and body fluids, subculturing blood culture
bottles, spilling specimens, and cleaning up spills.
For additional information, refer to the following:

Guidelines for Safe Work Practices in Human and Animal Medical Diagnostic Laboratoriespdf iconpdf icon
Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories, 5th Ed.
Laboratory biosafety guidance related to the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)pdf iconexternal icon


Reviewer feedback on this answer:
Answer not only gives a list of which procedures are likely to create aerosols but also gives links for additional information regarding safety and other guidelines that may help lab workers mitigate or reduce risks by changing how they do the listed procedures.
The answer provides specific procedures as examples and then provides additional resources for lab workers.

Reviewer ratings:
Excellent
Excellent