Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34142672›Full record

ArticleLa Medicina del lavoro2021

SARS-CoV-2 tests in occupational settings: what you look for is what you get.

Luca Ferrari, Simona Nigro, Lorenzo Bordini, Michele Carugno, Valentina Bollati

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in La Medicina del lavoro, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Luca FerrariEPIGET Lab, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. luca.ferrari@unimi.it.
Simona NigroEPIGET Lab, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. simona.nigro@studenti.unimi.it.
Lorenzo BordiniOccupational Health Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. lorenzo.bordini@policlinico.mi.it.
Michele CarugnoEPIGET Lab, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. michele.carugno@unimi.it.
Valentina Bollati. valentina.bollati@unimi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last month of 2019, a new Coronavirus from China started to spread all around the world causing a pandemic emergency still ongoing. The outbreak made imperative the need for diagnostic and screening tests that could identify the current and past infection state of an individual. Occupational medicine is facing a very demanding challenge, as the pandemic set off the need to re-evaluate many aspects of workplace safety. A fundamental role has been played by tests used to diagnose COVID-19 and to isolate infected asymptomatic subjects, with a view to the viral evolution and the emerging variants. However, the need for the urgent set-up of new methods for assessing both new and past infections has resulted in a large number of methods, not always comparable with each other, in terms of laboratory techniques, viral antigens used for detection, and class of antibodies detected. These factors make it difficult to understand the serological test results and their possible application. In this paper, we reviewed the types of assays currently available, to address some key aspects that characterize each technique, and might have an impact on results interpretation.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansPandemics

Identifiers

PMID34142672
PMCPMC8223938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.