Trial reportJAMA2019
N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01249625 (Incidence of Respiratory Illness in Outpatient Healthcare Workers Who Wear Respirators or Medical Masks While Caring for Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 221 papers, 21 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Incidence of Respiratory Illness in Outpatient Healthcare Workers Who Wear Respirators or Medical Masks While Caring for Patients
Who cites it
221 citing papers in PubMed, 21 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 456 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Masking strategy to protect healthcare workers from COVID-19: An umbrella meta-analysis.Infection, disease & health · 2023Pooled it
- Conservation Practices for Personal Protective Equipment: A Systematic Review with Focus on Lower-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of N95, surgical or medical, and non-medical facemasks in protection against respiratory virus infection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Reviews in medical virology · 2022Pooled it
- How efficient are facial masks against COVID-19? Evaluating the mask use of various communities one year into the pandemicTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Hand hygiene and facemask use to prevent droplet-transmitted viral diseases during air travel: a systematic literature review.BMC public health · 2021Pooled it
- Downsides of face masks and possible mitigation strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Recommendations for the Operation of Endoscopy Centers in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic - World Endoscopy Organization guidance document.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2020Guideline
- N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirator Use during Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.American journal of perinatology · 2020Pooled it
- A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients.International journal of nursing studies · 2020Pooled it
- Masks for prevention of viral respiratory infections among health care workers and the public: PEER umbrella systematic review.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2020Pooled it
- Pediatric Airway Management in COVID-19 Patients: Consensus Guidelines From the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia's Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative and the Canadian Pediatric Anesthesia Society.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2020Guideline
- Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2020Pooled it
- Guidelines: Anaesthesia in the context of COVID-19 pandemic.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2020Guideline
- Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2020Pooled it
161 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Clinical studies have been inconclusive about the effectiveness of N95 respirators and medical masks in preventing health care personnel (HCP) from acquiring workplace viral respiratory infections. Objective: To compare the effect of N95 respirators vs medical masks for prevention of influenza and other viral respiratory infections among HCP. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster randomized pragmatic effectiveness study conducted at 137 outpatient study sites at 7 US medical centers between September 2011 and May 2015, with final follow-up in June 2016. Each year for 4 years, during the 12-week period of peak viral respiratory illness, pairs of outpatient sites (clusters) within each center were matched and randomly assigned to the N95 respirator or medical mask groups. Interventions: Overall, 1993 participants in 189 clusters were randomly assigned to wear N95 respirators (2512 HCP-seasons of observation) and 2058 in 191 clusters were randomly assigned to wear medical masks (2668 HCP-seasons) when near patients with respiratory illness. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza. Secondary outcomes included incidence of acute respiratory illness, laboratory-detected respiratory infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory illness, and influenzalike illness. Adherence to interventions was assessed. Results: Among 2862 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 43 [11.5] years; 2369 [82.8%]) women), 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCP-seasons. There were 207 laboratory-confirmed influenza infection events (8.2% of HCP-seasons) in the N95 respirator group and 193 (7.2% of HCP-seasons) in the medical mask group (difference, 1.0%, [95% CI, -0.5% to 2.5%]; P = .18) (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.18 [95% CI, 0.95-1.45]). There were 1556 acute respiratory illness events in the respirator group vs 1711 in the mask group (difference, -21.9 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -48.2 to 4.4]; P = .10); 679 laboratory-detected respiratory infections in the respirator group vs 745 in the mask group (difference, -8.9 per 1000 HCP-seasons, [95% CI, -33.3 to 15.4]; P = .47); 371 laboratory-confirmed respiratory illness events in the respirator group vs 417 in the mask group (difference, -8.6 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -28.2 to 10.9]; P = .39); and 128 influenzalike illness events in the respirator group vs 166 in the mask group (difference, -11.3 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -23.8 to 1.3]; P = .08). In the respirator group, 89.4% of participants reported "always" or "sometimes" wearing their assigned devices vs 90.2% in the mask group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01249625.
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.