Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34570947›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical nursing2022

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Steven He, Anthony Hecimovic, Vesna Matijasevic, Ha Thi Mai, Linda Heslop, Jann Foster, Kate E Alexander, Naru Pal, Evan Alexandrou, Patricia M Davidson and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Steven HeSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0571-5318
Anthony HecimovicSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Vesna MatijasevicSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Ha Thi MaiSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Linda HeslopKen Merten Library, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jann FosterSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kate E AlexanderSouth Western Sydney Local Health District Public Health Unit, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Naru PalSouth Western Sydney Local Health District Public Health Unit, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Evan AlexandrouSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Patricia M DavidsonUniversity of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2050-1534
Steven A FrostSouth Western Sydney Nursing and Midwifery Research, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sydney Local Health District · AUIngham Institute · AULiverpool Hospital · AUGriffith University · AUNew South Wales Department of Health · AUUniversity of Wollongong · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

objectivesThis systematic review and meta-analysis reports the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses.

backgroundWith a growing body of literature reporting the positive serology for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthcare workers, it remains unclear whether staff at the point of direct patient care are more prone to developing and transmitting the virus. Given nurses make up the majority of the global health workforce, outbreaks among these workers could severely undermine a health system's capability to manage the pandemic. We aimed to summarise and report the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses globally.

designSystematic review and meta-analyses.

methodsThis systematic review was developed, undertaken and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. We searched the electronic medical literature databases: MEDLINE; CINAHL; and EMBASE for studies reporting the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nursing staff. Studies that reported nursing specific data were included in this review. Study quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for studies reporting prevalence data. Studies were stratified according to the World Health Organisation region classifications, and results were presented using forest plots and summary prevalence and variance was estimated using a random effects model.

resultsOur electronic search identified 1687 potential studies, of which 1148 were screened for eligibility after duplicates were removed, and 51 of the studies were included in our meta-analysis. The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses was estimated to be 8.1% (95% CI 6.9%-9.4%) among the 60,571 participants included in the studies. Seropositivity was highest in the African region (48.2%, 95% CI 39.2%-57.3%), followed by the European region (10.3%, 95% CI 8.0%-12.5%), the Region of the Americas (8.4%, 95% CI 6.0%-10.7%), the South-East Asia region (3.0%, 95% CI 0.00%-6.5%) and the Western Pacific region (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0%-1.0%). Pooled estimates were unable to be calculated in the Eastern Mediterranean region due to insufficient studies.

conclusionThe seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among nurses is comparable to other healthcare workers, and possibly similar to the general population. Early adoption and adherence to personal protective equipment and social distancing measures could explain these similarities, meaning the majority of staff contracted the virus through community transmission and not in a healthcare setting. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Fear and uncertainty have been features of this pandemic, including among nurses. This meta-analysis should provide some comfort to nurses that risks are similar to community exposure when adequate PPE is available and there is an adherence to infection control measures.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Antibodies, ViralHealth PersonnelHumansPrevalenceSeroepidemiologic StudiesAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19nursesSARS-CoV-2seroprevalence

Identifiers

PMID34570947
PMCPMC8661824
OpenAlexW3204411519

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.