Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34112899›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2021

SARS-CoV-2 serology in 4000 health care and administrative staff across seven sites in Lombardy, Italy.

Maria Teresa Sandri, Elena Azzolini, Valter Torri, Sara Carloni, Chiara Pozzi, Michela Salvatici, Michele Tedeschi, Massimo Castoldi, Alberto Mantovani, Maria Rescigno

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Analysis of the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in groups of medical and non-medical professions.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Observational
  14. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Teresa Sandri *IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Elena Azzolini *IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Valter TorriIstituto Di Ricerche Farmacologiche, Mario Negri" - IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Sara CarloniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Chiara PozziIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Michela SalvaticiIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Michele TedeschiIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Massimo CastoldiHumanitas Gavazzeni and Castelli, Bergamo, Italy.
Alberto MantovaniIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Maria RescignoIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. maria.rescigno@hunimed.eu.
IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · ITHumanitas University · ITHumanitas Gavazzeni · ITMario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research · IT

Funding

Italian Ministry of Health Ricerca corrente
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lombardy is the Italian region most affected by COVID-19. We tested the presence of plasma anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in 3985 employees across 7 healthcare facilities in areas of Lombardy with different exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Subjects filled a questionnaire to self-report on COVID-19 symptoms, comorbidities, smoking, regular or remote working, and the exposure to COVID-infected individuals. We show that the number of individuals exposed to the virus depended on the geographical location of the facility, ranging between 3 and 43%, consistent with the spatial variation of COVID-19 incidence in Lombardy, and correlated with family interactions. We observed a higher prevalence of females than males positive for IgG, however the level of antibodies was similar, suggesting a comparable magnitude of the anti-spike antibody response. IgG positivity among smokers was lower (7.4% vs 13.5%) although without difference in IgG plasma levels. We observed 11.9% of IgG positive asymptomatic individuals and another 23.1% with one or two symptoms. Interestingly, among the IgG positive population, 81.2% of subjects with anosmia/dysgeusia and fever were SARS-CoV-2 infected, indicating that these symptoms are strongly associated to COVID-19. In conclusion, the frequency of IgG positivity and SARS-CoV-2 infection is dependent on the geographical exposure to the virus and primarily to family rather than hospital exposure.

Indexed as

Adaptive ImmunityAdultAgedAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19COVID-19 Serological TestingFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin GIncidenceItalyMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2Antibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID34112899
PMCPMC8192543
OpenAlexW3169658792

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.