Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33115724›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2020

SARS-CoV-2 and Health Care Worker Protection in Low-Risk Settings: a Review of Modes of Transmission and a Novel Airborne Model Involving Inhalable Particles.

X Sophie Zhang, Caroline Duchaine

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. High levels of eicosanoids and docosanoids in the lungs of intubated COVID-19 patients.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2021
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. An overview of COVID-19 in solid organ transplantation.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

X Sophie ZhangDepartment of General Medicine, CIUSSS Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, Canada sophie.zhang.ccsmtl@ssss.gouv.qc.ca caroline.duchaine@bcm.ulaval.ca.
Caroline DuchaineDepartment of Biochemistry, Microbiology, and Bioinformatics, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada sophie.zhang.ccsmtl@ssss.gouv.qc.ca caroline.duchaine@bcm.ulaval.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-9912-0349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been intense debate over SARS-CoV-2's mode of transmission and appropriate personal protective equipment for health care workers in low-risk settings. The objective of this review is to identify and appraise the available evidence (clinical trials and laboratory studies on masks and respirators, epidemiological studies, and air sampling studies), clarify key concepts and necessary conditions for airborne transmission, and shed light on knowledge gaps in the field. We find that, except for aerosol-generating procedures, the overall data in support of airborne transmission-taken in its traditional definition (long-distance and respirable aerosols)-are weak, based predominantly on indirect and experimental rather than clinical or epidemiological evidence. Consequently, we propose a revised and broader definition of "airborne," going beyond the current droplet and aerosol dichotomy and involving short-range inhalable particles, supported by data targeting the nose as the main viral receptor site. This new model better explains clinical observations, especially in the context of close and prolonged contacts between health care workers and patients, and reconciles seemingly contradictory data in the SARS-CoV-2 literature. The model also carries important implications for personal protective equipment and environmental controls, such as ventilation, in health care settings. However, further studies, especially clinical trials, are needed to complete the picture.

Indexed as

AerosolsBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Cross InfectionHealth PersonnelHumansInfection ControlModels, BiologicalPandemicsParticulate MatterPersonal Protective EquipmentPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2VentilationAerosolsParticulate MatterbioaerosolsCOVID-19infection preventioninhalable aerosolslow-risk settingspersonal protective equipmentrespiratory protectionSARS-CoV-2ventilation

Identifiers

PMID33115724
PMCPMC7605309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.