Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33465486›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021

COVID-19 within a large UK prison with a high number of vulnerable adults, march to june 2020: An outbreak investigation and screening event.

Jennifer Wilburn, Eleanor Blakey, Amy Trindall, Helen Burr, Vince Tanti, Sue Doolan, Ian Palmer, Tony Jewell, Ravikumar Balakrishnan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jennifer WilburnEast of England Field Service, Public Health England, Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom; East of England Health Protection Team, Public Health England, Second Floor, Goodman House, Station Approach, Harlow, Essex, CM20 2ET, United Kingdom. Electronic address: Jennifer.wilburn@nhs.net.
Eleanor BlakeyEast of England Field Service, Public Health England, Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom.
Amy TrindallEast of England Field Service, Public Health England, Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom.
Helen BurrNorthamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, HMP Littlehey, Perry, Huntingdon, PE28 0SR, United Kingdom.
Vince TantiNorthamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, HMP Littlehey, Perry, Huntingdon, PE28 0SR, United Kingdom.
Sue DoolanHMP Littlehey, Perry, Huntingdon, PE28 0SR, United Kingdom.
Ian PalmerNational Health and Justice team, Public Health England, Premier House, 60 Caversham Road, Reading, RG1 7EB, United Kingdom.
Tony JewellCambridgeshire County Council, United Kingdom.
Ravikumar BalakrishnanEast of England Health Protection Team, Public Health England, Second Floor, Goodman House, Station Approach, Harlow, Essex, CM20 2ET, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the public health response to COVID-19 within a large prison with a high number of clinically vulnerable residents.

designAn outbreak investigation was undertaken among all residents and staff. A screening event involved nose and throat swab samples from residents and staff, examined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). An electronic questionnaire regarding risk factors was distributed to staff.

results58 residents out of 1,156 (5.0%, 95% CI: 3.8 - 6.3) and 129 staff out of 510 (25.3%, 95% CI: 21.5 - 29.1) displayed COVID-19 symptoms, including six and eight confirmed, respectively. Residents reported cough symptoms with no fever (29.3%), followed by a cough and fever (15.5%). 62.1% of symptomatic residents were 50 years or older, placing them in the group at risk for severe COVID-19 disease. Wing I had the highest attack rate (12.5%). 1,063 individuals were swabbed during the 5-day screening event, and all had negative swab results.

conclusionThe findings were consistent with the hypothesis of a propagating outbreak with decreasing incidence since the peak date of onset. COVID-19 transmission within a high-risk setting was quickly contained, and an explosive outbreak was prevented through a multi-agency public health response.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrisonsRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2United KingdomYoung AdultCOVID-19EpidemiologyOutbreak investigationPrison health

Identifiers

PMID33465486
PMCPMC7836881

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.