SynthesisActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2017
Invasive Meningococcal Disease on the Workplaces: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 in Homeless People from Urban Shelters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2023).Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Vaccinating Welders against Pneumococcus: Evidence from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Vaccines · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2-Legionella Co-Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2020-2021).Microorganisms · 2022Review
- Pharyngeal carriage rates of Neisseria meningitidis in health care professionals at a tertiary university pediatric hospital.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020Article
- Protocol of a scoping review assessing injury rates and their determinants among healthcare workers in western countries.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Autopsy Biosafety: Recommendations for Prevention of Meningococcal Disease.Academic forensic pathology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims of the work: Invasive Meningococcal Disease (IMD) represents a global health threat, and occupational settings have the potential to contribute to its spreading. Therefore, here we present the available evidences on the epidemiology of IMD on the workplaces.
methodsThe following key words were used to explore PubMed: Neisseria meningitidis, meningococcus, meningococcal, invasive meningococcal disease, epidemiology, outbreaks, profession(al), occupation(al).
resultsWe identified a total of 12 IMD cases among healthcare workers (HCW), 44 involving biological laboratory workers (BLW), 8 among school personnel, and eventually 27 from other settings, including 3 large industrial working populations. Eventual prognosis of BLW, particularly the case/fatality ratio, was dismal. As clustered in time and space, data about school cases as well as industrial cases seem to reflect community rather than occupational outbreaks. In general, we identified a common pattern for HCW and BLW, i.e. the exposure to droplets or aerosol containing N meningitidis in absence of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and/or microbiological safety devices (MSD) (e.g. cabinets). Post-exposure chemoprophylaxis (PEC) was rarely reported by HCW (16.7%) workers, and never by BLW. Data regarding vaccination status were available only for a case, who had failed requested boosters.
conclusionsThe risk for occupational transmission of IMD appears relatively low, possibly as a consequence of significant reporting bias, with the exception of HCW and BLW. Improved preventive measures should be implemented in these occupational groups, in order to improve the strict use of PPE and MSD, and the appropriate implementation of PEC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.