Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33831032›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Prevalence of SARS-COV-2 positivity in 516 German intensive care and emergency physicians studied by seroprevalence of antibodies National Covid Survey Germany (NAT-COV-SURV).

Detlef Kindgen-Milles, Timo Brandenburger, Julian F W Braun, Corvin Cleff, Kian Moussazadeh, Ingo Mrosewski, Jörg Timm, Dietmar Wetzchewald

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Detlef Kindgen-MillesDept. of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0108-8943
Timo BrandenburgerDept. of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Julian F W BraunDept. of Emergency Medicine, University Witten/Herdecke, Arnsberg, Germany.
Corvin CleffDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, German.
Kian MoussazadehDept. of Anesthesiology & Intensive Care Sana Hospital Duisburg, Duisburg, Germany.
Ingo MrosewskiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, MDI Limbach Berlin GmbH, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8824-5990
Jörg TimmInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Dietmar WetzchewaldDept. of Emergency Medicine, University Witten/Herdecke, Arnsberg, Germany.
Düsseldorf University Hospital · DEWitten/Herdecke University · DESana Kliniken Duisburg · DEUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Healthcare personnel are at risk to aquire the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We evaluated the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and positive nasopharyngeal reverse transcriptase polymerase-chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests in German intensive care and emergency physicians. Physicians attending intensive care and emergency medicine training courses between June 16th and July 2nd 2020 answered a questionnaire and were screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies via automated electrochemiluminiscence immunoassay. We recruited 516 physicans from all parts of Germany, 445/516 (86%) worked in high risk areas, and 379/516 (73%) had treated patients with COVID-19. The overall positive rate was 18/516 (3.5%), 16/18 (89%) had antibodies against SARS-COV-2, another 2 reported previous positive RT-PCR results although antibody testing was negative. Of those positive, 7/18 (39%) were unaware of their infection. A stay abroad was stated by 173/498 (35%), mostly in Europe. 87/516 (17%) reported a febrile respiratory infection after January 1st 2020 which was related to SARS-CoV-2 in 4/87 (4.6%). Contact to COVID-19 positive relatives at home was stated by 22/502 (4.4%). This was the only significant risk factor for Covid-19 infection (Fisher´s exact test, p = 0.0005). N95 masks and eye protection devices were available for 87% and 73%, respectively. A total of 254/502 (51%) had been vaccinated against seasonal influenza. The overall SARS-CoV-2 infection rate of german physicians from intensive care and emergency medicine was low compared to reports from other countries and settings. This finding may be explained by the fact that the German health care system was not overwhelmed by the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 Serological TestingCritical CarePhysiciansAdultAgedAntibodies, ViralFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceSARS-CoV-2Seroepidemiologic StudiesAntibodies, Viral

Identifiers

PMID33831032
PMCPMC8031427
OpenAlexW3147458855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.